Skip to content

"just" keyword missing from documentation #852

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

Open
paul-schaaf opened this issue Jul 10, 2022 · 8 comments
Open

"just" keyword missing from documentation #852

paul-schaaf opened this issue Jul 10, 2022 · 8 comments
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation good first issue Good for newcomers

Comments

@paul-schaaf
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@pokey pokey added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation good first issue Good for newcomers labels Jul 12, 2022
@pokey
Copy link
Member

pokey commented Jul 12, 2022

@paul-schaaf
Copy link
Contributor Author

this could be part of a larger new section called "inference" which itself could be a part of the target section

@jmegner
Copy link
Collaborator

jmegner commented Sep 5, 2023

#1707 fixed this and #1537, which I did not originally know was a duplicate

@auscompgeek
Copy link
Member

auscompgeek commented Sep 5, 2023

It looks like #1707 didn't describe the inference part of "just", which is was the main motivation for its existence.

@pokey
Copy link
Member

pokey commented Sep 6, 2023

It looks like #1707 didn't describe the inference part of "just", which is the main motivation for its existence.

We're actually starting to lean away from using "just" for that purpose and instead using "token", because "just" has all the other side effects mentioned in those new docs

That being said, it's probably worth calling out that inference piece, esp in the case of "just this", because you might not want to use "token this" and expand to containing token

Cc/ @AndreasArvidsson

@AndreasArvidsson
Copy link
Member

Yeah I think we should probably document that behavior

@pokey
Copy link
Member

pokey commented Sep 6, 2023

Sure, but I'm not sure we want to recommend it as the preferred way to break inference. Agreed?

@AndreasArvidsson
Copy link
Member

Yes

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation good first issue Good for newcomers
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants