> If we relax this position back towards Expression, then, if you want to pass
> such pairs, you could do so:
>
> foo`...${ {bar} }...${ {baz} }...`
>
> Recall that {bar} will be syntactic sugar for {bar: bar}. So this would
> expand to
>
> foo(literalPartsRecord, {bar: bar}, {baz: baz})
Ah, nice.
However, wouldn’t a different data structure be better for handlers? Zipping
arrays together feels like unnecessary work.
For example:
quasiHandlerName`quasiLiteralPart1 ${quasiSubstitution} quasiLiteralPart2`
=> quasiHandlerName([
{ raw: "quasiLiteralPart1 ", escaped: "quasiLiteralPart1 " },
{ value: ... },
{ raw: " quasiLiteralPart2", escaped: " quasiLiteralPart2" },
]);
The above example would work as follows (right?). This keeps the values as they
are, instead of turning them into strings ("{bar: bar}" and "{baz: baz}" seem
to be strings).
var bar = "abc";
var baz = 123;
foo`${{bar}}${{baz}}`
=> foo([
{ raw: "", escaped: "" }, // not really necessary, any more
{ value: "abc", key: "bar" },
{ raw: "", escaped: "" }, // not really necessary, any more
{ value: 123, key: "baz" },
{ raw: "", escaped: "" } // not really necessary, any more
]);
Alternatively, one could have two different types, one for literal parts, one
for substitutions.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
[email protected]
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
