Post #3030759
2026-06-01 18:30 UTC
@joe@f.duriansoftware.com Is there another way to support both relative enum `.constructor(...)` syntax and Swift-style semicolon avoidance while implicitly returning the last expression? That was the main constraint forcing me to have some sort of marker keyword for the last expression.
Replies (2)
-
@slava@mathstodon.xyz 2026-06-01 18:50
@zwarich@hachyderm.io @joe@f.duriansoftware.com I guess I’m in the minority that likes the statement vs expression distinction. It creates a natural boundary for units of work in the type checker
-
@joe@f.duriansoftware.com 2026-06-01 20:23
@zwarich@hachyderm.io maybe you could use a different scope modifier from the member accessor