To me it seems like minmax is *less* readable - between repeating the RHS (with min and max) vs condensing them and having nonobvious LHS syntax (with minmax), I'd prefer the current situation.
On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Xavier Stouder <[email protected]> wrote: > Even if I think it should be a performance improvement, the main goal > actually is to improve readability and conciseness of the code. > > > > When you say “I'd expect it to be something closer to [min, max] = > Math.minMax(foo, bar)”, are you saying that minmax (or minMax) should only > take two arguments ? I think that if it’s implemented like this, it would > obviously be not so usefull. > > > > Some questions about the proposal process : > > - Are champions reading and commenting this feed ? Can we have a > comment on this proposal maybe ? > > - Is the purpose of proposals to question how the proposal would > be implemented by JS engines ? > > - Talking about tests previously quoted : Is an JS > implementation of this proposal just approaching how efficient (or not) > would be the proposal after being implemented by JS engines ? > > > > Thanks for your feedback. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
