A way to chain == about cartography HOT 6 CLOSED

Yeah, Non-associative operator is adjacent to operator of same precedence is kind of a dealbreaker, I really don't want to override the associativity of ==.

Also, it would complicate capturing constraints.

from cartography.

There could be something like alignTopEdges(view1, view2, view3), too, but I'm not sure what the syntax should be.

from cartography.

I guess you could also have something like

layout(view1, view2, view3) { view1, view2, view3 in 
    combine(view1, view2, view3).top == view1.superview!.top
}

but that looks even more complicated

from cartography.

Fair points. I think #77 (comment) might be too specific, but is closest to what I'd envision. There could be a function that takes in a set of views, and an edge/dimension/size.

layout(view1, view2, view3) {
    equal([view1, view2, view3], Edge.top) // or Dimension or size
}

from cartography.

@mergesort Just my two cents: if you exchange the order of the arguments you can dispense with the square brackets by using variadic parameters equal(Edge.top, view1, view2, view3). That's probably better?

from cartography.

@truppelito Var args sound good to me. 👍

from cartography.