Records -- current status
brian.goetz at oracle.com
Tue Mar 20 13:43:33 UTC 2018
> Note: I've been curious what explicit destructuring is expected to
> look like.
As have we all :)
The underlying model for how destructuring works was discussed at my
JVMLS talk last year (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3_8YcYKScw) but
it didn't explore the syntax of how you would declare a matcher either.
We're currently struggling with finding a way to express this that (a)
supports all the desired degrees of freedom, (b) is not bizarre, and (c)
can be mechanically translated to something efficient. I have some
ideas but as this is a feature that's much farther down the road (first
we need basic pattern matching, then we need destructuring matching on
records, before hand-written matchers are a requirement), I'd rather not
distract the conversation with a syntax-oriented discussion. I am
working on a more concrete list of requirements for what explicit
matchers need to support, but I've been sitting on that because I want
to get the basics on a more solid footing first.
More information about the amber-spec-experts