On Mar 22, 2012, at 4:48 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
> On 22 March 2012 07:33, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.org> wrote:
>
> But why make misleading syntax? More of a question for John: why write
> |load("bar.js")| there, looking for all the world like a function call
> evaluated in order at runtime, when this is a special form evaluated before
> runtime?
Making it look like a function call is particularly bad. The assignment to the
literal is, IMO, much less confusing.
> I still wonder why you think it is so confusing to use the equality sign for
> module bindings. It is overloaded to mean "define as" and "assign" in almost
> all language that use it for the latter, and for different semantic
> categories, too. I never witnessed anybody being confused by that.
>
> I agree, though, that '=' is somewhat weird with a plain string on the RHS
> (but so is 'is'). Personally, I could get used to that, but maybe some
> variant with 'at' is more appropriate.
The 'at' might be appropriate but it just looks like an unfinished thought:
"the module foo at 'foo.js'" ...what? Both the import-as and module-= forms
state what the declaration is doing. The former declares it is importing the
module; the latter declares it is defining/assigning the module. Either is
sensible.
Dave
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
