On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Dean Landolt d...@deanlandolt.comwrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Mike Shaver
On Sep 29, 2011, at 6:04 AM, Dean Landolt wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Dean Landolt d...@deanlandolt.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.comwrote:
On Sep 29, 2011, at 6:04 AM, Dean Landolt wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.comwrote:
On
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:52 AM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Sep 27, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Sep 27, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
Out of curiosity is there any reason to keep
On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Dean Landolt wrote:
Hmm, I think I see what you mean, but the hole case is different enough and
anyway it has been in the language for 12 years.
True enough, but wouldn't you say it's still commonly misunderstood?
I don't hear enough about hole literal
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Dean Landolt wrote:
Hmm, I think I see what you mean, but the hole case is different enough and
anyway it has been in the language for 12 years.
True enough, but wouldn't you say it's
On Sep 28, 2011, at 1:53 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
Same here, but in comma-first it's not always adjacent:
var middleware = [ context,
, csrf
, xsite
, head
, considtional
, error
]
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
I agree holes need better handling in future arraylike extras. Design
effort there can start now, using today's JS. I'd welcome it. Perhaps
underscore does well already?
IIRC I chose the hole behaviour in the ES5 array
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
No worries, array extras are a great addition, we just need to keep rolling.
Oh, no offense taken. I just meant to say that there may be
consistency-with-existing-pattern reasons to prefer one hole behaviour
over another,
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Mike Shaver mike.sha...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
No worries, array extras are a great addition, we just need to keep
rolling.
Oh, no offense taken. I just meant to say that there may be
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Dean Landolt d...@deanlandolt.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Mike Shaver mike.sha...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com
wrote:
No worries, array extras are a great addition, we just need to keep
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Dean Landolt d...@deanlandolt.comwrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Mike Shaver mike.sha...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Brendan Eich
On Sep 27, 2011, at 6:11 AM, Sean Eagan wrote:
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Xavier MONTILLET
xavierm02@gmail.com wrote:
Normally, you use an object for optional arguments.
This is probably the most common case in practice, however...
And there is no good reason not to since you
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Sep 27, 2011, at 6:11 AM, Sean Eagan wrote:
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Xavier MONTILLET
xavierm02@gmail.com wrote:
Normally, you use an object for optional arguments.
This is probably the most common case
On Sep 27, 2011, at 12:50 PM, Sean Eagan wrote:
I agree, but it seems like holes in parameter lists would be no more
rare than holes in destructuring lists...
[a, , c] = arr;
Could be.
...so it seems strange to add it to one but not the other.
Destructuring uses the same grammar as
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Sep 27, 2011, at 12:50 PM, Sean Eagan wrote:
I agree, but it seems like holes in parameter lists would be no more
rare than holes in destructuring lists...
[a, , c] = arr;
Could be.
...so it seems strange
On Sep 27, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
Out of curiosity is there any reason to keep holes the holes around in
ObjectLiteral and ArrayLiteral?
No holes in ObjectLiteral.
It's true for ES6, opt-in only, we could change ArrayLiteral to remove holes.
This would make early errors for
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Sep 27, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
Out of curiosity is there any reason to keep holes the holes around in
ObjectLiteral and ArrayLiteral?
No holes in ObjectLiteral.
Apologies -- I was thinking of the
On Sep 27, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Sep 27, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Dean Landolt wrote:
Out of curiosity is there any reason to keep holes the holes around in
ObjectLiteral and ArrayLiteral?
No holes in
:
* rest parameters
* destructuring of individual parameters
However, there is at least one aspect which is not, which is
uninteresting parameters :
[x, , z] = arr;
which for parameter lists would look like:
function(x, , z) {...}
This could be useful when you are a defining a callback
are supported in parameter lists:
* rest parameters
* destructuring of individual parameters
However, there is at least one aspect which is not, which is
uninteresting parameters :
[x, , z] = arr;
which for parameter lists would look like:
function(x, , z
21 matches
Mail list logo
