If you're gonna add something, don't go halfway :f...

# announcements

[redrield]

If you're gonna add something, don't go halfway 🙄

[Ruckus]

redrield: You could say the same thing about operator overloading in Kotlin not letting you define your own operators. Or you could say that JB does a lot of research into the intended scope of a feature and implements it accordingly.

[Ruckus]

I find the latter to be true 🙂

[redrield]

I'd say the 2 scenarios are different

[redrield]

Allowing people to define custom operators as they please would clutter code and would give a vibe similar to scala

[redrield]

Limiting people makes sense

[redrield]

but this isn't making something that can be "abused" in that way

[redrield]

This is just making a nicer way to create collections

[redrield]

Like making matrices in Kotlin is piss ugly at the moment

[redrield]

arrayOf(arrayOf(0.0, 0.0), arrayOf(0.0))

[Ruckus]

I don't think the scenarios are that different, and if making matrices is an issue you run into often enough to be annoying, you should create functions to do it for you.

[redrield]

The scenarios are way different. This isn't something that would allow people to pollute their code with annotations who's purpose isn't immediately obvious (like |~> or whatever else scala programmers have come up with). this is just a more compact way to do something

[redrield]

I don't see the problem with having that available throughout the language

[Ruckus]

"a more compact way of doing something" is exactly what custom operators are. Really, collection literals are custom operators for a commonly used feature.

I'm not arguing for or against collection literals, I'm arguing against your claim that JB implemented this half way. I think they implemented them with a specific scope in mind and intentionally did not add them to the language as a whole.

[Ruckus]

The question of whether or not collection literals should be in the language is a much bigger issue that has many arguments for and against. (I tend to lean against them, but not strongly enough to really care.)

[redrield]

I just think that collection literals were either #1 or very high up in the community poll (Can't remember off the top of my head), would be a bit annoying if they limit the scope of it

[Ruckus]

I can't argue with that. I wonder who you would have to ask to get an explanation for why they did it this way and if they're planning to expand it to the whole language in the future.