On PC writing “§” character wouldn’t be convenient, as it’s not on
keyboard. One would has to copy and paste it. I see this as problematic.
Writing code should not require any extra acrobatics with set of
characters.
To be more constructive, available characters are:
!@#$%^&*()_+-=[]{};:'",<.>/?
W dniu .12.2017 o 21:56 Tamás Halasi <[email protected]> pisze:
Hmm I see. I'll definitely remove the multiple ? marks and keep it one
level.
And change the # to something else... For example, §.
With these changes, is there anything which should be changed?
2017-12-27 21:17 GMT+01:00 Isiah Meadows <[email protected]>:
My concern: I get the concept, and could see how at the first level
(e.g. `#? + ?`) it could be useful, but I can tell you that this
doesn't look especially obvious, and starts to look almost like the
line noise of some Perl or APL [1]/J [2]/etc.:
```
// Example 1:
let foo = #foo(#???:??)
// Example 2:
let constant = ##??
// Example 3:
let makeAdder = ##?+??
```
And I agree with Mike in that it does remind me of De Bruijn indices.
Those are nice in binary encodings, but they tend to start looking
like line noise after sufficient depth. (An entire esoteric language
has been formed based on this whole thing: Binary Lambda Calculus
[3].)
Oh, and this will most *certainly* conflict with the stage 3 private
property proposal:
```js
let bar = () => console.log("outer")
class Foo {
#bar = () => console.log("inner")
method() {
// Should this return a thunk or log "inner"?
list.map(##bar(1, 2, ?))
}
}
```
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_(programming_language)
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_(programming_language)
[3]: http://web.archive.org/web/20161019165606/https://en.
wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_lambda_calculus
-----
Isiah Meadows
[email protected]
Looking for web consulting? Or a new website?
Send me an email and we can get started.
www.isiahmeadows.com
On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Tamás Halasi <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> This sentence ends abruptly. What would this proposal improve?
>
> Oops, I accidentally pressed Send...
> So, it would improve functional programming in general, the examples
are
in
> the README.
>
>> Is this lambdas with De Bruijn indices?
>
> Hmm, I haven't heard of them yet, but by looking at the surface, they
seems
> to be similar.
>
>> You have ?? and ??? for referring to outer layers. Is there no
ambiguity
>> there?
>
> That's a very good point! I haven't thought of that. I can't think of
a
> solution, the lookahead is indeed very bad. I opened an issue. I think
the
> notation (for accessing arguments from outer layers) will have to be
changed
> / removed.
>
> Thanks for the 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
