Is nillable(String.t) less boilerplate than String.t | nil ? On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 9:12:42 AM UTC-5, Yordis Prieto wrote: > > I am more interested on the solution of `nil | t` I dont mind changing the > name to `nillable(t)` or whichever other word in English. > > The needs come from Ecto schemas and most of the struct fields will be > nillable(t), I thought it would be good to have something that represent > that common use case. > > On Tuesday, February 27, 2018 at 4:11:39 AM UTC-8, Yordis Prieto wrote: >> >> Introducing `maybe(t)` it will reduce the boilerplate code for `nil | >> something` >> >> It is more convenience to write it this way, at least for me. >> >> What are your thoughts about it? >> >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elixir-lang-core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/c0d589bc-951d-4b5d-afef-d652d8a84310%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
