-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
Placeholder FAQ claim overreaches #2381
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
The actual FAQ wording is:
I wouldn't mind changing the wording a bit, but I don't think we should remove the claim altogether given that this |
It's place holder syntax, where it's translated to I remember when I first saw someone point out how infix enables extra underscore powers. It seems magical at first, but is just ordinary syntax. Precedence rules matter in this example. |
Oops, I thought I'd removed that sentence, after Dale set me straight. I've strikethroughed it. |
Taxi drivers are on strikethru, so let me know if you need a ride from the airport. |
FAQ is for brevity. That's why we call it FAQ for short. |
Reproduction steps
Problem
The FAQ claims the function can't be written with placeholder syntax.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: