`Witchcraft.Chain.do_notation/2` intentionally ignores `chainer`

[florius0]

As far as I see, there are multiple places where second argument of chainer is used:

witchcraft/lib/witchcraft/chain.ex

Lines 410 to 431 in 73e3cc6

	def do_notation(input, _chainer) do
	input
	|> normalize()
	|> Enum.reverse()
	|> Witchcraft.Foldable.left_fold(fn
	continue, {:let, _, [{:=, _, [assign, value]}]} ->
	quote do: unquote(value) |> (fn unquote(assign) -> unquote(continue) end).()
	continue, {:<-, _, [assign, value]} ->
	quote do
	import Witchcraft.Chain, only: [>>>: 2]
	unquote(value) >>> fn unquote(assign) -> unquote(continue) end
	end
	continue, value ->
	quote do
	import Witchcraft.Chain, only: [>>>: 2]
	unquote(value) >>> fn _ -> unquote(continue) end
	end
	end)
	end

Instead >>> (Witchcraft.Chain.chain) is used.

Is it designed to be so, or it is a typo?

PS IMO it should be

def do_notation(input, chainer) do
  input
  |> normalize()
  |> Enum.reverse()
  |> Witchcraft.Foldable.left_fold(fn
    continue, {:let, _, [{:=, _, [assign, value]}]} ->
      quote do: unquote(value) |> (fn unquote(assign) -> unquote(continue) end).()

    continue, {:<-, _, [assign, value]} ->
      quote do
        apply(unquote(chainer), [unquote(value), fn unquote(assign) -> unquote(continue) end])
      end

    continue, value ->
      quote do
        apply(unquote(chainer), [unquote(value), fn _ -> unquote(continue) end])
      end
  end)
end