One of the stated advantages of the proposal is that because it is syntax driven it allows for static error messages limiting some bugs.
Using a method would not give the same degree of certainty of correctness as that would require assertions to be deferred to runtime, since EcmaScript is not statically typed. I think there could be other alternatives for the operator but I agree with the original proposal that it is good to use syntax for this use case. 2017年7月30日(日) 9:06 Naveen Chawla <[email protected]>: > I don't like the # symbol there. > > I would prefer something like Map.fromObject({ 'myKey': {}, myKey2: [] }); > etc. > > On Sun, 30 Jul 2017 at 02:51 Alexander Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > >> As a follow-up to https://esdiscuss.org/topic/map-literal I've finally >> (2 years? Really?) written up a proposal for extensible collection >> "literal" syntax (for Map, Set, Immutable.List, etc.) >> >> https://github.com/alex-weej/es-extensible-collection-literal >> >> Thanks >> >> Alex >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
