On Jan 30, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Brendan Eich wrote: >> Allen Wirfs-Brock <mailto:[email protected]> >> January 30, 2012 10:17 AM >> On Jan 30, 2012, at 5:00 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote: >> >>> On 28 January 2012 02:08, Allen Wirfs-Brock<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I played around a bit to see if I could come up with a troublesome example >>>> of the sort you may be thinking about. What I came up with is the follow: >>>> >>>> <script> >>>> module a { >>>> import {x:y} from b; >>> I think you wanted to say {y:x} here. >> >> no, I think {x:y} means creating a binding for x that is linked to b.y > > No, the binding name is in the property value position. This is why the > shorthand works: import {x} from b; would bind local x to b.x. > > Some find this "backwards" but it has to be this way -- the property name > destructured from the RHS is on the left of : and the binding name is on the > right. The shorthand helps in most cases, and backwards-sensitive people > learn :-|.
Of source, and I've even written the spec. for destructuring with the ordering you intend. Obviously, by backwards bit flipped sometime recently... Allen _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
