News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Towards Scala 3 by ionforce on Friday April 20, 2018 @05:04PM (#16888426)
It's only surprising if you ascribe monadic properties to that syntax versus understanding it as literal syntactic sugar and absolutely nothing else.
Re:Towards Scala 3 by clhodapp on Friday April 20, 2018 @08:14PM (#16889279)
I would say: it is `Set` and `List` that are wrong in that example, not `for`. That said, `for` really does have some issues (enter https://github.com/oleg-py/better-monadic-for/blob/master/RE...)