On Apr 29, 2010, at 11:34 AM, Mike Samuel wrote:
2010/4/29 Brendan Eich <[email protected]>:
On Apr 29, 2010, at 12:25 AM, Alex Russell wrote:
Some small, pre-colored panels for the shed. Given that these are
mostly
matters of syntax and not semantics, please believe me when I
suggest that
the warts discussed herein present sharp edges that should be
rounded off by
the committee -- not because they're interesting in any way but
because the
primary users of the language are shipping (bad) fixes around the
network
billions of times a day. Such rank inefficiency needs sunset date.
This is not just about syntax. Let's ignore the threat of being
accused of
bikeshedding and evaluate holistically.
(What mailer are you using that mixes up citation levels so badly?)
The hash or number sign is not obviously all about functions. I've
tried out
the other alternatives in recent talks. No one is really
enthusiastic about
any of
λ foo() (bar + baz)
ƒ foo() (bar + baz)
\foo() (bar + baz)
(the foo name is optional but should be expressible).
The Greek lowercase lambda is actually an incompatible change from
ES3
(perfectly legal identifier there). It's also hard to type on most
keyboards.
I'm not arguing for lambda since it is a pain to type, but this is not
true if you make it a restricted production, and make the name non
optional
<lambda> (no line separator) <identifier>
cannot appear in a valid ES3 program.
Yeah, true -- but then that's a different proposal.
Requiring the name loses for most use-cases and users, as far as I can
tell.
[massive tail overcite trimmed -- at least it was not topcited :-P.]
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
