On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote:
> David Herman wrote: > >> To be clear: what I'm suggesting is that expression closures would *not* >> be syntactic sugar for statement bodies, but rather would be >> TCP-respecting. Most of the time this wouldn't even be noticeable, until >> you use do-expressions. >> > I'm not sure do expression syntax is freaky-deaky enough. Maybe, maybe not. > > Also, if we hope to get shorter function syntax into ES6 this is a bridge > too far. Later, sure. Just a consideration. I could see reaching consensus > on shorter function syntax sooner than on a new f-d TCP form. Honestly, I'm starting to believe that most nay-sayers would get over block-lambda looking weird at first and learn to really love the benefit it provides. Sure they might say "it looks really bizarre", but they will also say "remember when we had to assign var that = this; or use bind()? The dark ages!! I love block-lambda!" Even for me, it was hard to look past the weirdness, but the more I read about "freaky-deaky" syntax, the more it begins to make sense. /two cents. Rick > > > /be > ______________________________**_________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/**listinfo/es-discuss<https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss> >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
