On Nov 22, 2010, at 11:19 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >> Probably we need to take our time and not rush into a meta-programming-here >> syntax variant of for-in. I'll not propose anything better right now. > > If the colon is less future-compatible than we like, why not: > > foreach (var i in x)
All the new words are not reserved, so they could begin a function call expression in extant code: hi = "there" foreach (i in x) print(i) means hi = "there"; foreach(i in x); print(i); today. Same if you s/foreach/iterate/ or any non-reserved identifier. Wherefore Allen's co-opting of enum (plus with, a decent preposition given enum but 8 chars in two keywords hurt kittens everywhere). Anyway, the bikeshed is secondary. We need to agree on what meta-programmable for-in means with the enumerate trap (specified by the wiki pages on harmony:proxies), how that changes with the optional iterate trap (strawman:iterators), and when it might matter (for all for-in loops, or only those in Harmony code?). /be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
