I believe that David Bruant has a good point. We *need* a shorter syntax because we advocate the use of map/reduce, etc., which require simple anonymous functions.
As to why we should choose # rather than coffescript's ->, there are two points: - The # syntax is more readable. -> is perlish. It looks like two very much used operands, "minus" and "greater than", without any related meaning. Python, which has an enormous emphasis on readability, is ready to add the ':' at the end of the line before each block to make it readable. Here, greater readability is on par with a decrease in the number of characters needed. - I talked to Alex Russell about this, and his answer was: "Arrow requires recursive descent, fat arrow just passes the buck on bind. Not settled." This seems like an interesting issue that makes the # syntax even more agreeable. As to comment on Kyle Simpson's raised issue, it is true that this channel lacks web developers' intervention. I am a simple web developer myself. I must admit most developers don't sign up to this mailing list because it can be complex to handle (lot of stuff to read) and there is no tl;dr. As such, the "voting poll" idea isn't absurd. If done well, on the ecmascript's webpage, and with ads on Mozilla's mdn, it can give an interesting estimate of how popular it would be... On the other hand, it cannot be safe. People would vote without digging deep enough into why such proposal is nice to have. As a result, we can't promise that the result of the poll will be chosen by the committee. _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
