Multiple Record parameters in With function

[sopatt]

Hopefully this is where language implementation ideas go to live.

So the With function takes a record in its first argument which defines a record context that can be used in the second argument. I often find myself nesting with functions because I want to define a second set of variables based on the first set. My idea is to allow 2 or more arguments where the last argument is the same as current, but anything but the last argument is essentially a nested with, i.e. each argument provides a record context for all following arguments, preventing any need to nest multiple Withs.

So instead of With({A:Some.Stuff,B:SomeOther.Stuff},With({C:SomeFormula(A,B)},SomeFormula(A,B,C))) we can do With({A:Some.Stuff,B:SomeOther.Stuff},{C:SomeFormula(A,B)},SomeFormula(A,B,C))

With({X:Value(Input.Text)}, With({LogX:Min(Int(Log(X,1000)),4)}, Round(X/1000^LogX,2) & Mid("kMBT",LogX,1) ) )

With( {X:Value(Input.Text)}, {LogX:Min(Int(Log(X,1000)),4)}, Round(X/1000^LogX,2) & Mid("kMBT",LogX,1) )

[MikeStall]

I see the same problem - With() quickly gets deeply nested.
Note that fields within a record are unordered , so we can't just collapse it to a single record.

This is a good suggestion. Others thoughts?

[anderson-joyle]

This is an interesting idea. Wondering if we could use this change to improve SetFormula somehow.