> Let me counter with: > > function declaration, generator function declaration > function expression, generator function expression > concise method, concise generator method > arrow function (, generator arrow function)
I don’t mind generator function declarations, but I personally will not use function declarations under ES6 (or at least try out const arrows and see how they feel). And I’ll do the same with generator function declarations, should we get generator arrow functions. If it works out then function declarations are a legacy feature (for me). > That would make the async programming code more compact, too (I’m assuming a > nullary paren-free arrow variant and I prefer the asterisk after the arrow): > > To be clear, this preference is inconsistent with all other generator forms > where the asterisk is before the params, per Brandon's original examples. Ah, missed that. Thought it was *=>. I don’t mind either way, my (admittedly weak) mnemonic would be “asterisk after function-defining token”. -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de home: rauschma.de twitter: twitter.com/rauschma blog: 2ality.com
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
