You're right about that. You probably wouldn't get very far without understanding that. I'm still concerned that I have to type unnecessary stuff to express myself without getting any gains in (new Link("a" :: "b" :: nil) vs Link("a", "b")) :D
- Vesa On 2 marras, 22:27, Jim Barrows <jim.barr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Vesa <brut...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > I was wondering few thing while reading lift examples. Could the Link > > class be turned into a case class so reading would improve? new Link > > ("a" :: "b" :: nil, false) could be RecursiveLink("a", "b") and new > > Link("a" :: "b" :: Nil) could be something like AbsoluteLink("a", > > "b"). This would at least eliminate the need to explain scala's list > > Shouldn't the reader already be aware of Scala's list construction, since > that is in fact the language we're using? > If you think Scala's list construction is difficult to for a new reader, I > think explaining a case class would be even more confusing. > > You might want to look at how case classes differ from a normal > class<http://www.scala-lang.org/node/258>as well. > > construction syntax to the reader. I found out extremely unintuitive > > > the syntax to create Links with dsl like ("help" :: "" :: Nil) -> > > true. This syntax is usually associated with generation of key-value > > pairs even in lift APIs and creates confusion (at least on my case). I > > guess varargs might be out of question if scala backward compatibility > > is considered, but I don't see a reason not to use case classes here. > > > - Vesa > > -- > James A Barrows --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---