Steven Chen (Dec 10 2024 at 17:25): Steven Chen (Dec 10 2024 at 17:25):The current syntax is original_name: new_name tripping me every time. How should I overcome this :joy:
e.g.
addAndStringify = \{ birds, iguanas: lizards } ->
Num.toStr (birds + lizards)
But in my mind, I feel new_name: original_name is more natural. In record syntax likex: y, x is the identifier, y is the value. In the example above, in the scope of addAndStringify, lizards feels like the new identifier and iguanas should be the value.
Richard Feldman (Dec 10 2024 at 17:28):what if it were { original_name as new_name } ?
Steven Chen (Dec 10 2024 at 17:29):yeah. A different operator or keyword would fix it :)
Richard Feldman (Dec 10 2024 at 17:29):that's something I've been thinking about from a consistency perspective, because as is how we rename things pretty much everywhere else
Brendan Hansknecht (Dec 10 2024 at 17:30):goodbye symmetry....but makes sense
Notification Bot (Dec 10 2024 at 22:39):Steven Chen has marked this topic as resolved.
Last updated: Jul 06 2025 at 12:14 UTC