On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 8:02 AM kdex <[email protected]> wrote: > [Douglas Crockford](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nlqv6NtBXcA) and > [Brendan Eich](https://brendaneich.com/2010/11/paren-free/) seem > > to be in favor of making them optional; that's why the strawman exists. > > The strawman exists because I wrote it, yes.
I was inspired by the common (not ubiquitous) style of always bracing sub-statements. The paren-free meme did "stick" with Rust, but it seems doomed for JS on account of the problems Waldemar Horwat raised: https://esdiscuss.org/topic/another-paren-free-gotcha Not the cited example, that seemed to forget that paren-free requires braces around the sub-statement in absence of leading left paren after controlling keyword. I pointed this out here: https://esdiscuss.org/topic/another-paren-free-gotcha#content-9 Waldemar's other example showed a refactoring hazard: """ if (a + b/g > f) f = a + b/g Convert it to paren-free: if a + b/g > f {f = a + b/g} So far so good; it works. However, later someone discovers that the code had a logic error, the fix to which is to divide the sum a+b by c instead of dividing only b by c. So he fixes the code to: if (a + b)/g > f {f = (a + b)/g} """ Anyway, the proposal predates 1JS (note my last message talks about "opt in") and needs a champion who can resolve the refactoring hazard worry (if possible). /be
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
