<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div>I had a short user feedback sessions with Patrick and James, the short summary is:</div><div><br></div>1) simplify the syntax to optimize for the most common use case<div>2) 'concurrency' is the best word - but bring it out of for-each to task level, or task/policies </div><div>3) all-permutation - relatively rare case, either implement as a different construct - like ‘for-every’, or use workaround.</div><div><br></div><div>Another feedback is for-each as a term is confusing: people expect a different behavior (e.g., run sequentially, modify individual elements)</div><div>while it is effectively a ‘map’ function. No good suggestion on the better name yet. Keep on looking.</div><div><br></div><div>The details are added into the document.</div><div><br></div><div>DZ. </div><div><br><div><div>On Dec 15, 2014, at 2:00 AM, Nikolay Makhotkin <<a href="mailto:nmakhotkin@mirantis.com">nmakhotkin@mirantis.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">Hi,<div><br></div><div>Here is the doc with suggestions on specification for for-each feature.</div><div><br></div><div>You are free to comment and ask questions.</div><div><br></div><div><a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iw0OgQcU0LV_i3Lnbax9NqAJ397zSYA3PMvl6F_uqm0/edit?usp=sharing">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iw0OgQcU0LV_i3Lnbax9NqAJ397zSYA3PMvl6F_uqm0/edit?usp=sharing</a></div><div><br></div><div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><font>Best Regards,</font></div><div><font>Nikolay</font></div></div></div>
</div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>