After a few minutes more thought, this approach can be simulated pretty
well by a library solution.
Suppose you wrote the following class (once):
sealed class Result {
record Succ(T t) extends Result { }
record Fail(E e) extends Result { }
interface
The following idea was received on amber-spec-comments.
Essentially, the OP is asking that, if we're extending switch to cover
more different kinds of cases, why not further extend it to treat an
exception in evaluating the target as another kind of matchable result.
It is a little like the
> From: "Brian Goetz"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "Gavin Bierman" , "Manoj Palat"
> , "amber-spec-experts"
>
> Sent: Lundi 19 Juillet 2021 15:49:22
> Subject: Re: [External] : Re: case null and type pattern
> Sure, but again, I think users would find that restriction even more annoying;
> the
