Please no, while i can see how logically it's derived from a = a + 1 a = a.f()
a .= f() seems like a bad idea i can hardly see the dot why would i replace the object from which i'm calling the method in most cases looks inefficient On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > Do not send "Please add" messages with two-line, half-baked sketches of > extensions to the language. That's just injecting noise with very little > signal. > > The "-1" you received will be the answer if pressed from everyone on TC39, > I would bet real money. Syntax is expensive, adding it for little semantic > gain and some downside user-confusion risk (plus a small complexity tax > hike for the language in full) is never the right answer. > > That you can scratch this itch (and many others like it) via sweet.js does > not argue for incorporating any such =. or .= operator into the core > language. Analyze developer patterns and nearby languages for better > candidate extensions that solve more serious usability or greater issues. > > /be > > > Florent FAYOLLE wrote: > >> Hello, >> >>> x .= f() should be syntax sugar for x = x.f() >>> >>> x .= f().g().h() should be x = x.f().g().h() >>> >> >> +1! I've made some weeks ago a prototype of this in sweet.js: >> https://github.com/fflorent/member-access-assignment >> >> Except that the syntax is rather =. (I have probably been influenced by >> the CoffeeScript's existential operator). The reverse looks fine to me too. >> >> -1 Please no :) >>> >> Why? >> >> Florent >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
