Could we add EitherX ?

[Corentin Clabaut]

I guess we could have:

type Either3[T1 any, T2 any, T3 any] struct {
	argId int

	arg1 T1
	arg2 T2
	arg3 T3
}

Constructors:

mo.CreateEither3Arg1()
mo.CreateEither3Arg2()
mo.CreateEither3Arg3()

Methods:

.IsArg(i int)
.Arg1()
.Arg2()
.Arg3()
.MustArg1()
.MustArg2()
.MustArg3()
.Arg1OrElse()
.Arg2OrElse()
.Arg3OrElse()
.Arg1OrEmpty()
.Arg2OrEmpty()
.Arg3OrEmpty()
.ForEach()
.Match()
.MapArg1()
.MapArg2()
.MapArg3()

@samber If you agree that it could be useful I could add Either3/4/5
If this is added I'm wondering if we should then have Either2 instead of the current Either type for consistency?
And maybe mark the current Either as deprecated?

[Samuel Berthe]

That's an interesting idea.

Can you store argId into a uint8? Can you rename CreateEither3Arg1 to NewEither3Arg1, in order to respect Go conventions?

I would rather keep the Either data structure, since methods are a bit different and closer to the monad naming.

Let's start with Either3/4/5. Either6/7/8/... will be added in the future if necessary.

[Corentin Clabaut]

Sounds good, I'll add that