C# 8: Switch expressions

#1

Post by azhenley » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 2:52 PM UTC

Re: C# 8: Switch expressions

#2

Post by rattray » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 3:19 PM UTC

This might be better titled "C# 8: switch expressions" (edit: it was previously "statement", as the author's post is titled).

Or actually, to bait a few more hn clicks (and provide a fuller description): "Pattern matching in C# 8 with switch expressions"

Re: C# 8: Switch expressions

#3

Post by jmnicolas » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 3:25 PM UTC

rattray wrote: post #2

This might be better titled "C# 8: switch expressions" (edit: it was previously "statement", as the author's post is titled). Or actually, to bait a few more hn clicks (and provide a fuller description): "Pattern matching in C# 8 with switch expressions"

This might be better titled "changing things for the sake of changing things and appealing to the programming language geeks".

The new syntax is not intuitive, not more readable, just a bit more terse.

Re: C# 8: Switch expressions

#4

Post by chrismeller » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 3:27 PM UTC

rattray wrote: post #2

This might be better titled "C# 8: switch expressions" (edit: it was previously "statement", as the author's post is titled). Or actually, to bait a few more hn clicks (and provide a fuller description): "Pattern matching in C# 8 with switch expressions"

Agreed. I was wondering what they could have possibly changed in ye olde switch statements we’ve all been using for decades.

Edit: ye, iOS, ye!

Re: C# 8: Switch expressions

#5

Post by jakear » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 3:28 PM UTC

To me, all these IIFE’s make a good case for adding a block-as-expression construct. Either take from Scala, where every block evaluates to the last expression executed in that block (and every statement is an expression); or maybe introduce some new syntax (‘do { .... }’ maybe?) if the prior would be a breaking change.

Re: C# 8: Switch expressions

#6

Post by arethuza » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 3:28 PM UTC

jmnicolas wrote: post #3

rattray wrote: post #2

This might be better titled "C# 8: switch expressions" (edit: it was previously "statement", as the author's post is titled). Or actually, to bait a few more hn clicks (and provide a fuller description): "Pattern matching in C# 8 with switch expressions"

This might be better titled "changing things for the sake of changing things and appealing to the programming language geeks". The new syntax is not intuitive, not more readable, just a bit more terse.

Actually, I think it is rather intuitive and readable - but then again I programmed in lisp for years.

Re: C# 8: Switch expressions

#7

Post by platz » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 3:29 PM UTC

    // now you kind of enforced to
    // handle all values, otherwise
    // it will not compile

I fail to see how it will not compile if all values are not handled. C# switch is not traditional pattern matching, because you don't get compile time feedback.

Claiming that is does is disingenuous.

Re: C# 8: Switch expressions

#8

Post by azhenley » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 3:29 PM UTC

    "+" => ((Func)(() => {
        Log("addition");
        return a + b;
    }))(),

This is incredibly ugly. Why couldn’t it be “+” => {stuff}

Re: C# 8: Switch expressions

#9

Post by pron » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 3:31 PM UTC

Java is also getting switch expressions next month (as a preview feature in JDK 12): https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/325

Re: C# 8: Switch expressions

#10

Post by chrismeller » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 3:35 PM UTC

jmnicolas wrote: post #3

rattray wrote: post #2

This might be better titled "C# 8: switch expressions" (edit: it was previously "statement", as the author's post is titled). Or actually, to bait a few more hn clicks (and provide a fuller description): "Pattern matching in C# 8 with switch expressions"

This might be better titled "changing things for the sake of changing things and appealing to the programming language geeks". The new syntax is not intuitive, not more readable, just a bit more terse.

This actually seems to be somewhat of a trend in C# as of late. Ever since they introduced lambdas, really.

While I use them every day, my favorite is still “replacing” String.Format with string literals. Shorter, sure, but less intuitive particularly for people coming from another language. You can do roughly the same thing in PHP with backticks, but most people avoid them for the same reasons.

I’m not sure how I feel about the trend as a whole. As long as I can continue using the old methods as well I suppose I don’t have much room to complain, but sometimes it does feel like we’re just changing for the sake of change and that’s usually a bad indicator.