Re: New EEP draft: Pinning operator ^ in patterns

:-) % Deprecated, going to be removed soon, superfluous
    % ... and a bit "childish" ... :-)

On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 17:40:49 +0100
Loïc Hoguin <[email protected]> wrote:

> But I would not be OK if Erlang allowed this:
>
>    Config = case get_config() of
>        undefined -> default_config();
>        Config -> [{extra, value}|Config]
>    end

Too late?

    "Zazou, comment allez-vous?"

```
8> Conf = case [3] of
8>     undefined -> [1];
8>     Newconf -> [2 | Newconf] end.
[2,3]
9> Conf.
[2,3]
```
    "Or am I losing my mind?"


> should not add more. Better yet if this shadowing becomes completely
> forbidden. Then there's no confusion to be had about which variable ^

Somewhere in the archive R. Virding told ROK
that every FL did shadow, but, alas!, not why.

Can shadowing not "simply be ignored"?
because of what I described in C6 in

  http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2021-January/100399.html

? I get a warning, think of a better name --
take the opportunity to reflect on what I am doing! --
done: no shadowing.

I am growing an impression that people name terms,
or even types, instead of purposes.

    "Or am I losing my mind?"

~M

--

Reasonable is that which cannot
be criticised reasonably anymore.

Vernüftig ist das, was nicht mehr
vernünftig kritisiert werden kann.