20:27 | <TabAtkins> | We've been considering void as a no-binding matcher in Pattern Matching; that might work here? using void = ...; |
20:27 | <TabAtkins> | Oh lol littledan just said that |
20:42 | <littledan> | I think void would be a little funny for this purpose given that it’s an operator |
20:42 | <littledan> | And this case shows it would be nice to be accessible outside of pattern matching |
21:07 | <bakkot> | crazy thought: _ as an identifier can be redeclared as long as it's never referred to (and there's no direct eval s in scope, I guess?) |
23:09 | <littledan> | crazy thought: |
23:10 | <littledan> | And I guess we don’t enforce in the old sloppy constructs |
23:10 | <bakkot> | don't love the idea of a local binding which throws when referenced |
23:10 | <bakkot> | reading local bindings should not be side-effecting |
23:10 | <littledan> | Why? We already have TDZ |
23:10 | <bakkot> | hm, I guess |
23:10 | <littledan> | It would literally be in TDZ |
23:10 | <bakkot> | for now, anyway |
23:11 | <littledan> | Ah! |
23:11 | <bakkot> | I would prefer a static error but runtime is also ok I guess |