thrush

At first glance it reminds me of unix pipes, clojure's thrush operator, and F#'s pipe forward operator.

This is an infix operator commonly used to define the Thrush combinator, which transcends Elixir (or any other programming language).

It seems to me what the author desires is linguistic support for the Thrush combinator[0].

For example, we know that sterilization an antibiotics raise the risk of harmful fungal infections (thrush, ringworm, etc).

They cite Gleam explicitly, which has a thrush operator in place of method chaining.

Just have to be willing to slow down a little for a bit and enjoy it instead of expecting to thrush thru everything.

That got worse for a couple of days then suddenly oral thrush.

My wife and MIL were all about sterilising, and the liners aren't guaranteed sterile so for the first few months there's the risk of thrush.

Everyone on HN knows my handle is thrush, so can comment at me, or dm me using any contact info I've provided.

Of course, if (like thrush) you do not plan on doing a merge, then you will need to do the fetch manually and do what you do want to do.

I would prefer not naming things over badly named things, for example, and that's usually how I decide between let and thrush (all things being otherwise equal).

I am less interested in the threading macros (thrush).

Thrush is the "T combinator" - I believe that the "Thrush" name comes from To Mock a Mockingbird by Raymond Smullyan [1].

I agree that the "thrush macro" is not such a good example to show the greatness of the Lisp family of language.

Clojure's libraries implement the same "pass in a block" pattern as Ruby, but with more universal names in most cases, and with more consistency (which is important due to the thrush combinators).

What kind of bird is that?” I said, “I haven’t the slightest idea what kind of a bird it is.” He says, “It’s a brown-throated thrush.