caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Mr. Herr" <misterherr@freenet.de>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Syntax for several matches, each with a "when" clause, but only one result
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 10:37:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <573ECCD0.8060106@freenet.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0F7D3B1B3C4B894D824F5B822E3E5A172CF046D5@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1740 bytes --]



On 20.05.2016 09:57, Soegtrop, Michael wrote:
>
> Dear OCaml Users,
>
>  
>
> sometimes I want to do something like
>
>  
>
> match expr with
>
> | case1 when cond1
>
> | case2 when cond2
>
> | case3 when cond3 -> result
>
>  
>
> but this doesn’t work. I have to write
>
>  
>
> match expr with
>
> | case1 when cond1 -> result
>
> | case2 when cond2 -> result
>
> | case3 when cond3 -> result
>
>  
>
> Usually only some of the matches have a when clause. Is there a way to avoid
> copying the result term (other than writing a function) ?
>
>  
>
>
I could not see a working web link to this old list message from 2016-04-07, so I
just give you a copy of the answer by
Gabriel Scherer:

No, indeed you have to use a local definition to avoid code
duplication in this case.

My understanding of the design stance of pattern-matching in OCaml is
as follows: the syntax of patterns is bounded by what can be matched
efficiently. This explains why "when" has a second-class status
(first-class when cannot be matched efficiently); sometimes the user
has to pay for this rigidity. But, on the positive side, it is a
simple and clear stance, and it correlates with the availability of
good tooling, namely exhaustivity and useless-clause warnings.

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Daniel Bünzli
<daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Something I run quite often is the following pattern matching
>
> match v with
> | None | Some c when sat c -> expr
> | Some …
>
> which doesn't compile and forces me to write
>
> match v with
> | None -> expr
> | Some c when sat c -> expr
> | Some …
>
> and leads to code duplication or the introduction of a definition to avoid it.
>
> Am I missing a syntax bit ?
>
> Best,
>
> Daniel


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4290 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2016-05-20  8:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-05-20  7:57 Soegtrop, Michael
2016-05-20  8:37 ` Mr. Herr [this message]
2016-05-20 10:04   ` Soegtrop, Michael
2016-05-20 10:23     ` Mr. Herr
2016-05-23 15:35       ` Christophe Raffalli

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=573ECCD0.8060106@freenet.de \
    --to=misterherr@freenet.de \
    --cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).