Mark Seemann

My feedback

  1. 2 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      You have left! (?) (thinking…)
      0 comments  ·  F# Language  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
      Mark Seemann shared this idea  · 
    • 6 votes
      Vote
      Sign in
      Check!
      (thinking…)
      Reset
      or sign in with
      • facebook
      • google
        Password icon
        Signed in as (Sign out)
        You have left! (?) (thinking…)
        1 comment  ·  F# Language  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
        Mark Seemann shared this idea  · 
      • 7 votes
        Vote
        Sign in
        Check!
        (thinking…)
        Reset
        or sign in with
        • facebook
        • google
          Password icon
          Signed in as (Sign out)
          You have left! (?) (thinking…)
          2 comments  ·  F# Language  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
          Mark Seemann supported this idea  · 
          Mark Seemann commented  · 

          In C#, this feature exists, and has the following form:

          #pragma warning disable 618
          code...
          #pragma warning enable 618

          This enables you to suppress specific compiler warnings locally, which is quite important for evolving APIs: sometimes you need to deprecate a particular API (function, type), but keep it around for backwards compatibility. This means that your own code may still need to use the deprecated code for a while longer (for e.g. unit tests), so it'd be nice to enable that scenario without suppressing all other warnings.

        • 127 votes
          Vote
          Sign in
          Check!
          (thinking…)
          Reset
          or sign in with
          • facebook
          • google
            Password icon
            Signed in as (Sign out)
            You have left! (?) (thinking…)
            7 comments  ·  F# Language  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
            Mark Seemann supported this idea  · 
          • 15 votes
            Vote
            Sign in
            Check!
            (thinking…)
            Reset
            or sign in with
            • facebook
            • google
              Password icon
              Signed in as (Sign out)
              You have left! (?) (thinking…)
              6 comments  ·  F# Language  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
              Mark Seemann commented  · 
              Mark Seemann commented  · 

              It'd also be nice with a built-in computation builder.

              Mark Seemann commented  · 

              Other nice-to-haves:

              Option.map2: ('a -> 'b -> 'c) -> 'a option -> 'b option -> 'c option
              Option.map3: ('a -> 'b -> 'c -> 'd) -> 'a option -> 'b option -> 'c option -> 'd option

              The List module defines map2 and map3, so it'd be natural to add these to the Option module as well.

            • 39 votes
              Vote
              Sign in
              Check!
              (thinking…)
              Reset
              or sign in with
              • facebook
              • google
                Password icon
                Signed in as (Sign out)
                You have left! (?) (thinking…)
                29 comments  ·  F# Language  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
                Mark Seemann commented  · 

                Like Daniel Robinson, I think that since the order matters, being able to view that order at a glance is valuable.

                If that feature is removed, I suspect we'll see files named 010Foo.fs, 050Bar.fs, etc. That's not a place I'd like to go.

              • 311 votes
                Vote
                Sign in
                Check!
                (thinking…)
                Reset
                or sign in with
                • facebook
                • google
                  Password icon
                  Signed in as (Sign out)
                  You have left! (?) (thinking…)
                  23 comments  ·  F# Language  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

                  I am generally in favour of addressing this in F# 4.x+. I would want seq { .. } and async { … } tailcalls to also be addressed.

                  A more detailed design is needed and some trialling would be great. Jack’s work is a great start. However, this is not an easy piece of work to do in a non-invasive way and my own experiments in this area have not yet led to something I feel confident to include in the F# language design.

                  An implementation and testing would need to be provided by someone in the F# community (possibly including Microsoft or Microsoft Research, though not limited to them).

                  Currently, initial implementations of approved language design can be submitted as pull requests to the appropriate branch of https://github.com/Microsoft/visualfsharp. See http://fsharp.github.io/2014/06/18/fsharp-contributions.html for info on how to contribute to the F# language/core library design

                  I encourage you to consider continue…

                  Mark Seemann supported this idea  · 
                • 457 votes
                  Vote
                  Sign in
                  Check!
                  (thinking…)
                  Reset
                  or sign in with
                  • facebook
                  • google
                    Password icon
                    Signed in as (Sign out)
                    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
                    under review  ·  37 comments  ·  F# Language  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
                    Mark Seemann supported this idea  · 

                  Feedback and Knowledge Base