Sorry for being unclear. Your point that it should be unnecessary to name unimportant things is a valid one. Can you share the specifics of scenarios where you have 3-tuples and larger where it doesn't make sense to give names to each part? Elm's design is based on finding clean solutions to real-world problems, so more examples of that are valuable to inform Elm's future development.
You also mentioned that you ran into this when using 3rd-party packages. Can you point out some of the packages where you've needed to use functions that returned 3-tuples and larger where you only cared about one of the values in the tuple? On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Mike MacDonald <crazym...@gmail.com> wrote: > I can't think of a use case where defining an intermediary type wouldn't > solve the immediate issue; philosophically I dislike naming things which > are unimportant. > > On Tuesday, December 27, 2016 at 1:08:03 PM UTC-5, Aaron VonderHaar wrote: >> >> One reason `first` and `second` are only defined for 2-tuples is that >> it's usually a better choice to use records if you have more than a couple >> fields. >> >> If defining a record type alias and giving names to you're fields doesn't >> work for your situation, can you give more details about why? >> >> On Dec 27, 2016 7:09 AM, "Mike MacDonald" <craz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On a somewhat regular basis, I end up needing to extract a single field >>> from a tuple provided from a third-party function. At the moment, I have to >>> write a boilerplate function just to pattern match it out. If I need the >>> second field of tuple of a different size, I need to write more boilerplate. >>> >>> Seeing as record filed names cannot start with digits, and the language >>> only allows up to Tuple9, it would be nice to have `.0` through `.8` as >>> accessors to the tuple. This is symmetric with record field access >>> "methods", and seems like a moderate ergonomic gain. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> -- >>> 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...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- > 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. > -- 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.
