Hi Marius,
I won't say the idea is bad, but what would be the benefit of this new
type of function?
From experience on this list, if a new idea cannot prove to make a
major difference with what currently exists, it is not considered to be
added to the ES6 spec.
The major difference can be in performance, security, language
extensibility, programming idioms/conveniences, etc.
Do you have reasons to think pure functions as you propose them make
that big of an improvement as opposed to JS as it is?
David
Le 28/11/2012 12:50, Marius Gundersen a écrit :
Has there been any work done on pure functions in EcmaScript? The way
I imagine it, there would be a way to indicate that a function should
be pure (by using a symbol or a new keyword, although I understand new
keywords aren't terribly popular). The pure function is not allowed to
access any variable outside its own scope. Any access to a variable
outside the scope of the function would result in a Reference Error,
with an indication that the reference attempt was made from a pure
function. This also applies to any function called from within the
pure function. The entire stack of a pure function must be pure. This
also means the pure function cannot access the [this] object. Only the
parameters passed to the function can be used in the calculation.
The syntax could be something like this (the @ indicates that it is pure):
function sum@(a, b){
return a+b;
}
var sum = function@(a, b){
return a+b;
}
Marius Gundersen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
