Replies: 2 comments 2 replies
-
|
This seems like a lot to add for everything; I assume there's a default behavior and we could document (hopefully a small number of) exceptions? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yes. I think this question only truly matters for subs and methods that get their results from already existing values, so mostly methods of a Positional, Associative, etc. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but this is just about documenting binding/assignment/copying for return types, right? If I understand correctly, the current signatures already document binding/etc for parameters via |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Alas, it's very-very included in the signatures. Yes, it might be enough if they were actually included. I don't know if they were supposed to but it would definitely make sense. I think it would be good to get them in a more readable format than an e.g |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Relates to Raku/problem-solving#337
Hi,
for now, this is rather hypothetical because used assignments and containerization is a bit all over the place, so there is no need to work out something elaborate. I rather mean this as brainstorming and/or declaration of intents.
It would be nice to document if a certain function/method binds to containers, copies, or decontainerizes. Do you think this is a good idea, and if so, how do you think it could be added to the documentation (once clearly specified in the language)?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions