I like the simplicity of Gleam a lot. I like "one way of doing things" philosophy. No ifs - just case, no loops - just recursion, etc.
Now I wonder why was let assert introduced 🤔 If I'm not mistaken same functionality could be achieved by using case + panic. In the Gleam language tour it is mentioned that "this feature should be used sparingly". I wonder why having such feature at all then?
#Why was `let assert` introduced to the language?
native ridge
latent roost
It can provide better debug information than case + panic as it can include the pattern that didn't match
bool panic will be added too
which again is very similar to case + panic
heady wolf
bool `panic` will be added too
Bool assert you mean?
native ridge
Thanks for providing the context. Just read the proposal Bool assert.
If it gets in then Gleam will have few ways for panicking: panic, let assert, bool assert 🤔
Hmm I guess this part of the language feels different from the others from my (new to the language) perspective. Few different ways of doing things = a bit of confusion 😄
Though I get different levels of context they can provide - just a message, module/function/line, runtime value which caused the problem, ...
latent roost
It's the most duplicated bit of the language, for sure.