I didn't ask for anything indeed, I was rather pointing out your RegExp search was not so accurate. The rest, once again, I agree with David, rationales or not.
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > Andrea Giammarchi wrote: > >> FWIW, function [A-Za-z_] includes `var expr = function expr() {}` or >> `{expr: function expr(){}}` both quite common patterns (the first one when >> you want to be able to debug the name of the function but due inline, later >> on, features detection, the former might change) >> > Sure, I wasn't giving the exact regexen required for distinguishing cases > of NFEs from FDs, if you get my abbreviations :-). > > > Still I agree with David and asked again indeed what was the rationale >> for arrow function that in my opinion solves only one very specific case >> and nothing else ... came out in CoffeeScript that is the most common case >> (I don't even understand why is that but ... hey, I don't CoffeeScript so I >> believe that's OK) >> > > Don't keep asking for rationales (a) that are already given, and (b) that > you don't like (whether they have objective groundings -- this one does -- > or not). We've been over this a zillion times. Didn't I already refer you > to Kevin's quantitative analysis in the last thread from October? > > http://esdiscuss.org/topic/what-kind-of-problem-is-this- > fat-arrow-feature-trying-to-solve#content-23 > > To rehash yet again, with an aggrieved tone, is just you being aggressive > for no purpose. Please stop. Arrows are in ES6. Take a deep breath, get > over it. > > /be >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
