See https://github.com/tc39/tc39-notes/blob/master/es6/2014-06/jun-5.md#generator-comprehensions-slides-plz
https://speakerdeck.com/dherman/a-better-future-for-comprehensions https://github.com/tc39/tc39-notes/blob/master/es6/2014-07/jul-30.md#47-revisit-comprehension-decision-from-last-meeting On Apr 16, 2017, 9:36 AM, at 9:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <[email protected]> wrote: >Ryan Birmingham wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> I frequently find myself desiring a short array or generator >> comprehension syntax. I'm aware that there are functional ways around >> use of comprehension syntax, but I personally (at least) love the >syntax >> in the ES reference >> >(https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Array_comprehensions). >> >> The best previous discussion on this that I found was six years old >> (https://esdiscuss.org/topic/array-comprehensions-shorter-syntax) and >> answers some of my questions, raising others. That said, I wanted to >ask: >> >> * Why is the Comprehension Syntax in the reference yet not more >> standard? It feels almost like a tease. > >IIRC, it was discussed here throroughly for ES6 (~2yrs ago?) and it was > >rejected in favour of .map/.filter/arrays fns. > >> * How do you usually approach or avoid this issue? >> * Do you think we should look at improving and standardizing the >> comprehension syntax? >> >> >> Thank you all for humoring me, >> >> -Ryan Birmingham >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
