Proposal: switch expressions

[David Koblas]

Jordan,

One question that I have lingering from pattern matching is why is the syntax so different?  IMHO it is still a switch statement with a variation of the match on the case rather than a whole new construct.  

Is there somewhere I can find a bit of discussion about the history of the syntax decisions? 

--David


> On Feb 25, 2019, at 12:33 PM, Jordan Harband <ljharb at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Additionally, https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pattern-matching - switch statements are something I hope we'll soon be able to relegate to the dustbin of history.
> 
>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 6:01 AM David Koblas <david at koblas.com> wrote:
>> I quite aware that it’s covered in do expressions. Personally I find do expressions non-JavaScript in style and it’s also not necessarily going to make it into the language.  
>> 
>> Hence why I wanted to put out there the idea of switch expressions. 
>> 
>> --David
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 25, 2019, at 5:28 AM, N. Oxer <blueshuk2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> This would be covered by do expressions. You could just do:
>>> 
>>> ```js
>>> const category = do {
>>>   switch (...) {
>>>     ...
>>>   };
>>> };
>>> ```
>>> 
>>>> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 10:42 AM David Koblas <david at koblas.com> wrote:
>>>> After looking at a bunch of code in our system noted that there are many 
>>>> cases where our code base has a pattern similar to this:
>>>> 
>>>>      let category = data.category;
>>>> 
>>>>      if (category === undefined) {
>>>>        // Even if Tax is not enabled, we have defaults for incomeCode
>>>>        switch (session.merchant.settings.tax.incomeCode) {
>>>>          case TaxIncomeCode.RENTS_14:
>>>>            category = PaymentCategory.RENT;
>>>>            break;
>>>>          case TaxIncomeCode.INDEPENDENT_PERSONAL_SERVICE_17:
>>>>            category = PaymentCategory.SERVICES;
>>>>            break;
>>>>          case TaxIncomeCode.INDEPENDENT_PERSONAL_SERVICE_17:
>>>>            category = PaymentCategory.SERVICES;
>>>>            break;
>>>>        }
>>>>      }
>>>> 
>>>> I also bumped into a block of go code that also implemented similar 
>>>> patterns, which really demonstrated to me that there while you could go 
>>>> crazy with triary nesting there should be a better way.  Looked at the 
>>>> pattern matching proposal and while could possibly help looked like it 
>>>> was overkill for the typical use case that I'm seeing. The most relevant 
>>>> example I noted was switch expressions from Java.  When applied to this 
>>>> problem really create a simple result:
>>>> 
>>>>      const category = data.category || switch (setting.incomeCode) {
>>>>        case TaxIncomeCode.RENTS_14 => PaymentCategory.RENT;
>>>>        case TaxIncomeCode.ROYALTIES_COPYRIGHTS_12 => 
>>>> PaymentCategory.ROYALTIES;
>>>>        case TaxIncomeCode.INDEPENDENT_PERSONAL_SERVICE_17 => 
>>>> PaymentCategory.SERVICES;
>>>>        default => PaymentCategory.OTHER;
>>>>      }
>>>> 
>>>> Note; the instead of using the '->' as Java, continue to use => and with 
>>>> the understanding that the right hand side is fundamentally function.  
>>>> So similar things to this are natural, note this proposal should remove 
>>>> "fall through" breaks and allow for multiple cases as such.
>>>> 
>>>>      const quarter = switch (foo) {
>>>>        case "Jan", "Feb", "Mar" => "Q1";
>>>>        case "Apr", "May", "Jun" => "Q2";
>>>>        case "Jul", "Aug", "Sep" => "Q3";
>>>>        case "Oct", "Nov", "Dec" => { return "Q4" };
>>>>        default => { throw new Error("Invalid Month") };
>>>>      }
>>>> 
>>>> Also compared this to the do expression proposal, it also provides a 
>>>> substantial simplification, but in a way that is more consistent with 
>>>> the existing language.  In one of their examples they provide an example 
>>>> of the Redux reducer 
>>>> https://redux.js.org/basics/reducers#splitting-reducers -- this would be 
>>>> a switch expression implementation.
>>>> 
>>>>      function todoApp(state = initialState, action) => switch 
>>>> (action.type) {
>>>>        case SET_VISIBILITY_FILTER => { ...state, visibilityFilter: 
>>>> action.filter };
>>>>        case ADD_TODO => {
>>>>            ...state, todos: [
>>>>              ...state.todos,
>>>>              {
>>>>                text: action.text,
>>>>                completed: false
>>>>              }
>>>>            ]
>>>>          };
>>>>        case TOGGLE_TODO => {
>>>>            ...state,
>>>>            todos: state.todos.map((todo, index) => (index === 
>>>> action.index) ? { ...todo, completed: !todo.completed } : todo)
>>>>          };
>>>>        default => state;
>>>>      }
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> es-discuss mailing list
>>>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20190225/e6f31d3a/attachment.html>