> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Andrea Giammarchi <[email protected]> > To: Jordan Harband <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Bcc: > Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:23:03 +0200 > Subject: Re: Small Proposal "!in" > and, as previously mentioned, `!obj.x` might have side effects through the > accessor, as example in every lazily defined property that would be early > defined (or anything else behind a getter that could do more than just > telling the property is there and it's not truthy). >
Peanut gallery observation: I personally think !in is a Really Bad Idea, or at least I'm not convinced that it's particularly useful. If it is useful, then let one of the transpiling languages like CoffeeScript or TypeScript demonstrate it first. Also, there's the little matter of pronunciation. I admit to a bit of snarkiness when I first saw this proposal, but I didn't expect it to have any traction. So I'll just say it: do we really want JavaScript to be a "bangin' " language? Alex -- "The first step in confirming there is a bug in someone else's work is confirming there are no bugs in your own." -- Alexander J. Vincent, June 30, 2001
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
