Le 18 nov. 2013 à 19:38, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> a écrit :
> Ѓорѓи Ќосев wrote:
>> Its harder to scan whether this is a generator arrow function or a normal
>> arrow function because the star is too far away:
>>
>> someFunction(*(someArgument, anotherArgument) => {
>> ... code ...
>> });
>>
>> compared to this form, where its immediately obvious that this is not a
>> regular function, just by looking at the composed symbol (arrow-star)
>>
>> someFunction((someArgument, anotherArgument) =>* {
>> ... code ...
>> });
>
> I buy it. This is what I'll propose next week as concrete syntax. It's a
> small point, but the rationale is "the star goes after the first token that
> identifies the special form as a function form." For generator functions,
> that token is 'function'. For arrows, it is '=>'.
>
> /be
From the thread [1], I guess that parsing correctly the following thing would
be obnoxious (at best)?
(a = yield/b/g) =>* {}
—Claude
[1]: http://esdiscuss.org/topic/generators-grammar-and-yield
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
