I think the problem is slightly different than you think. The reason the
compiler complains about the redundant pattern is that "x" already matches
everything. There are no more cases for "_" to handle.
This compiles with no problem:
let
x = 1
in
case something of
x -> ...
I expect that you are actually looking to do something like this:
let
x = 1
in
case something of
Just x -> ...
Nothing -> ...
On Sunday, December 4, 2016 at 6:05:10 AM UTC-5, Michał Podwórny wrote:
>
> Thanks for clearing things out!
>
> W dniu niedziela, 4 grudnia 2016 02:40:41 UTC+1 użytkownik Michał Podwórny
> napisał:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Consider this:
>> let
>> x = 1
>> in
>> case something of
>> x -> (...)
>> _ -> (...)
>>
>> The compiler will complain that "The following pattern is redundant",
>> pointing to the wildcard. I assume that Elm ignores the fact that "x" is
>> already bound, re-binds it in the first case match and that indeed makes
>> the wildcard redundant. I know how I would do this in Elixir: I'd put "^"
>> before "x" to explicitly say not to re-bind the x variable. Is there
>> something like this in Elm?
>>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm
Discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
