> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Douglas Crockford <[email protected]> > To: Oliver Hunt <[email protected]> > Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:09:33 -0700 > Subject: Re: Re: Day 2 meeting notes > On 11:59 AM, Oliver Hunt wrote: >> >> I keep seeing code like this, I simply don't see it as viable to have "for >> (.. in ...)" sometimes enumerate property names, and some times enumerate >> keys, it seems like it could be both confusing and error prone. esp. given >> the simplest example: [x for (value in [1,2,3])] you would not get the >> desired behaviour, unless in comprehensions for(in) behaves differently from >> everywhere else. >> It seems far better to just define a distinct syntax for enumerating values >> of an object. > > I agree. We talked about swapping out the preposition, so for..in produces > keys, and for..of or for..from produces values. >
What about using 'for .. vin' - i.e. value-in for value enumeration And adding a redundant 'for .. kin' - i.e. key-in for key enumeration (for those who prefer explicitness over using the ambiguously named 'for .. in' which would retain its original key iteration behavior)? Or are 'vin' and 'kin' too nonsensical to gain any acceptance? regards, Faisal Vali _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
