My statement was addressing your and others’ religious pushback against having two optional styles. Your attempt to paint me in a bad light by juxtaposing a strident statement against a more benign but incorrect characterization of the position I was responding to, is disingenuous. You (and another) are/were indeed advocating a position where there should be no tolerance and instead only one style shall be allowed:
Also I bet you only work on your own code, because you told in the past what you usually use Scala for.
Moving on…
The problem with the
end map
idea is not the regularity–although it does have a regularity problem with multiple parameter lists–but thatend map
seems like it ought to end a statement, not be in the middle of of a fluent chain. I’m totally fine with the idea ofend map
.But I’m not very fine with the idea of end markers followed by
.
. The precedence of associativity feels wrong, and the overall flow feels wrong.
I agree, except I also don’t like the end markers in any case. I was already composing a reply to @sjrd about that.