I'm highly doubting something like this will be made just because of wanting to use the same variable name. What's the real use, besides more code than using a different variable name.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 6:46 PM, Jordan Harband <[email protected]> wrote: > What would happen if this operator was used in the global scope? > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Bucaran <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Sometimes you have a function that receives a parameter shadowing an >> existing function or variable in the parent scope. >> >> In _some_ cases I would like to use the same variable name to avoid >> having to come up with new names. Contrived example ahead: >> >> ```js >> import path from "path" >> >> function doSomething (_path) { >> if (path.dirname(_path) === "/" ) { >> // ... >> } else { >> } >> } >> ``` >> >> It would be nice if there was a special construct like `typeof` or >> `instanceof` that would take a name and evaluate to whatever >> variable / function of the same name existing in the parent scope (or >> undefined otherwise). >> >> ```js >> import path from "path" >> >> function doSomething (path) { >> if ((insteadof path).dirname(path) === "/" ) { >> // ... >> } else { >> } >> } >> ``` >> >> In this case the expression above using the made-up `inteadof` operator >> would evaluate to the imported `path` variable >> instead of the `path` variable name. >> >> >> Regards >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> > > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
