Skip to content

Conversation

@lpwisniewski
Copy link
Contributor

Solve (maybe partially) #4903.
Most of the new abbreviations are copied from scala/scala#6499

Copy link
Member

@dottybot dottybot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hello, and thank you for opening this PR! 🎉

All contributors have signed the CLA, thank you! ❤️

Have an awesome day! ☀️

@allanrenucci
Copy link
Contributor

Can we use the .withAbbreviation(...) syntax instead

@lpwisniewski
Copy link
Contributor Author

I don't mind to change it, but why would it better ?

@allanrenucci
Copy link
Contributor

allanrenucci commented Dec 15, 2018

I guess it is a matter of taste. However this is not the coding style we are currently following in Dotty. You will find multiple usages of the infix notation across the code base but we avoid it for newly committed code. The only exception is for symbolic operators.

Copy link
Contributor

@Blaisorblade Blaisorblade left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks reasonable, and worth merging (even tho the code style is not perfect).

@Blaisorblade Blaisorblade merged commit 4c5ca04 into scala:master Jan 23, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants