Kevin Smith wrote:
I like the => syntax, but I'm not convinced regarding single arrow
functions.
Me neither.
Some observations:
1) A shorter function syntax for classic functions doesn't seem to
carry much payoff.
Only six letters.
2) Generally, users will want closures to have lexically-bound this.
The strawman makes this possible via either do expressions ("=> do")
or this initializers ("(this=this, ...) -> {}"), both of which are
somewhat "clunky".
No, the strawman says => *always* lexically binds |this|. How was it
unclear? I will fix it.
I'm going to cut the this=... jazz.
Also, in my analysis, I discovered that the most common number of
formal parameters for arrow function candidates is one. I think that
readability can be improved if we can eliminate parenthesis for this
common case, as in C#.
array.map((x) => x * x);
// vs.
array.map(x => x * x);
We could do this, but only for the single identifier case.
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
