Hi,
I am sorry that I am so dense in my communication, I meant not only "no code
block without formal introduction", but also adding a keyword to the
repertoire that, in those rare cases of free code block (they are not really
that common), introduces a free code block. The rule of NCBWFI makes the
code really formally clearer. You see in François's example that the change
is not big (I would personally like "local" more than "eval", somehow the
old associations from the university sprung up from SML/NJ course where
local and let were coupled, so it seemed like good choice, but "local"
cannot be a keyword since it is surely used in _lots_ of places as a
variable name).
Herby
-----Pôvodná správa-----
From: Maël Nison
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 2:56 PM
To: Herby Vojčík
Cc: François REMY ; [email protected]
Subject: Re: No code block without introductory keyword (was: Re: Boolean
shortcuts)
If we force a formal block introduction, there will be some problems
with codes like this one :
var foo = function ( ) {
{
let x = 42;
console.log( x );
}
{
let x = 24;
console.log( x );
}
}
On 4 January 2012 14:51, Herby Vojčík <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
what you proposed seems like a pretty good idea (at least imho).
All other uses of {...} as code block have a introductory keyword /
control
structure (if, else, while, do, function), and even the newcomer {...}
uses
like module and class are preceded by one. If (maybe in "strict ES6+"
only)
there was the general rule of "no code block without formal introduction",
it could make parsing much more quirk-free (and it would be clearly define
that {...} without introduction is _always_ object literal (or, more
broadly, data-producing {...} (declarative curlie)) in contrast to
imperative curlie that contains some form of action to perform).
Herby
-----Pôvodná správa----- From: François REMY
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 2:27 PM
To: Herby Vojčík ; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Boolean shortcuts
I agree that code block is a complex feature that is (almost) never used
and
that has many quirks.
If ES6 could remove it, I would not be upset at all. If it's here to stay,
we should at least have an introductory keyword like "eval { ... }" and
allow "var x = eval { ... }".
BTW, I think the reason of your inconsistency is a bug : eval("{}") should
return undefined, as in IE9. It seems that node.js has a special case for
{}, probably to avoid a common mistake. Or there's a bug in the parser, I
don't know.
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Maël Nison
Epitech 2014, Paris - Astek
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
