On Oct 31, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > On Oct 30, 2011, at 11:07 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: > >> On Oct 30, 2011, at 5:55 PM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote: >> >>>> The only thing I find off the mark is the typography of <|. In light of >>>> this, and of the anti-grawlix reaction among many people, could we revisit >>>> an infix operator used in restricted productions with [no LineTerminator >>>> here] on the left of the operator contextual keyword? >>> >>> I hope this is not just in deference to a few vocal opponents. >> >> That's not the way to approach this. You could be among the few vocal >> *pro*ponents of <| -- do we need a statistically significant and valid >> survey? >> >> There are plenty of fonts in which the triangle appearance is ugly or lost. >> There are people who object independent of fonts to JS growing line-noise >> hair at its advanced age. These are both worth considering. They can't be >> dismissed with "few" and "vocal". > > I've heard the "line noise" objection many time but I don't understand the > thinking that seems to say you can only introduce new symbology into a > language at its initial creation and that all post initial release extensions > must be natural language based.
That's too dogmatic, I agree. The grawlix objection was not a rigorous one, rather an outcry against a tendency that can be overdone. And which bites back hard in some fonts. The typography issue persists. > <| or <: or "beget" is going to be a very important "operator" going forward > and is used in expression context where the norm is special character-based > operators. Adding a new symbol for such an operator seems quite reasonable. > Wholesale re-grawlix-ifying the entire language would be unacceptable. > Adding one or two new symbols for key features is not that. No, but if the typography and quantity of punctuation-pairings is off enough, there'll be push-back and ongoing controversy. I don't see this one solving itself by exposure and familiarity. If we had a more universally triangular (pointing left) sequence, probably we wouldn't be here. My gut-check, FWIW. /be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
