So I take it most would prefer this as a prefix operator. What would be the next steps involved to iterate on this idea?
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah, and it would line up with cover grammar needed for > refutable-by-default patterns. > > /be > > Matthew Robb wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Did you keep backward compatibility? `x?.1:y` must continue to work. >> >> >> This is why I suggested a leading operator (`?a.?b()`) because it seems >> like it would have the least potential for conflict with existing valid >> syntax >> >> >> >> - Matthew Robb > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss -- Christoph Pojer http://cpojer.net _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
