On 31 May 2012 12:12, Andreas Rossberg <[email protected]> wrote: > On 31 May 2012 12:52, T.J. Crowder <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2. I originally envisioned this as a statement (of course, I was > originally > > thinking we'd have a new keyword, until the object extension literal > > discussion), but it could be an expression; if so, presumably the result > of > > the expression would be the object. > > Note that, if this is an expression, then you are introducing a > variant of `do'-expressions through the backdoor (i.e., a way to nest > statements into expressions). That is a significant change to the > language, so it only is an option if we agree to have `do'.
Indeed, though unintentionally. I think the two are closely related, but can be decided individually. FWIW, I have no strong opinion (not that matters!) on whether these should be expressions. Those who are deeper in the process can speak to that question rather more usefully than I. I do kind of like how them being expressions bypasses the question of extending object initializer syntax possibly past the breaking point (my #5). -- T.J.
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
