just a few days ago another full stack JS dev mentioned Array replace and it has nothing to do with what was proposed in here: https://medium.com/@gajus/the-case-for-array-replace-cd9330707243
My TL;DR response was that once the pipe operator is in, everyone can bring in its own meaning for `array |> replace` and call it a day. Keep polluting the already most polluted prototype of them all doesn't look like a good strategy to improve the language. Just my 2 cents. On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 3:37 PM T.J. Crowder < [email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Ben Wiley <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hm, despite the fewer number of points in the cons category I'm > persuaded by > > the argument that we don't want people getting arrays and objects > confused. > > Might be best to limit that until there is a compelling use case which > there > > might not be. > > Heh, whereas despite having written that first bullet in the footgun > column somewhat forcefully (looking back), I go the other way. :-) > > -- T.J. Crowder > _______________________________________________ > 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
