@ is currently reserved for decorators, # currently for private fields. There aren't a lot of compelling syntax options left, to be sure.
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Kenneth Powers <[email protected]> wrote: > What proposal is "@" reserved for, by chance? I was trying to pick > something that both wasn't used and can't be the name of a variable (e.g., > underscore). I saw another proposal for "?" for partially applying > functions, but that would be potentially ambiguous with the ternary > operator. > > As for resolving ambiguity, why not just do what Scala does > <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19916169/scala-arguments-of-nested-lambdas-with-short-syntax/19917720>? > It would seem to me that nesting these functions would be a sign you need > to refactor anyway. > > As far as meriting its own syntax, that's why I referenced another > language where the implementors found that it did merit its own syntax > (though the underscore in Scala also does a lot more). > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Jordan Harband <[email protected]> wrote: > >> In Scala, the ambiguity of the underscore causes lots of confusion when >> you have nested functions - how is that handled in your proposal? >> >> Bear in mind, I think it's a tough argument that `@ + 1` is so much >> better than `n => n + 1` that it warrants its own syntax. >> >> Separately, the "@" is reserved for an existing proposal, so you'd have >> to come up with different syntax anyways. >> >> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Kenneth Powers <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I have a proposal for new syntax in ES inspired by the placeholder >>> syntax in Scala Functions >>> <http://docs.scala-lang.org/overviews/quasiquotes/expression-details.html#function> >>> . >>> >>> Essentially, the idea would be to allow anonymous arguments. The most >>> simple example would be a function which takes one argument (as far as the >>> programmer is concerned): >>> >>> [1, 2, 3].map(@ + 1) >>> >>> This would be the same thing as: >>> >>> [1, 2, 3].map(n => n + 1) >>> >>> Just like in Scala, an anonymous function is created. This concept can >>> be further extended in ES: >>> >>> [1, 2, 3].reduce(@0 + @1, 0) >>> >>> Which would be the same thing as: >>> >>> [1, 2, 3].reduce((sum, n) => sum + n, 0) >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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
