It's off topic to the thread, so either way it's not appropriate to bring it up here.
It's not objectively a mistake, and calling it "stupid" is absolutely toxic. Be nice, or don't participate. I'll refer you to https://github.com/tc39/code-of-conduct which governs this list as well. On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 2:14 AM, kai zhu <[email protected]> wrote: > Dependency resolution logic is platform-specific > > > @jordan, platform-specific logic is not a real problem? the behavior of > import-statement between babel (sync), native-browser (async), > native-nodejs (sync???) are all subtly different. and yes, it's > effectively a with-statement. > > its not toxicity. its reminding tc39 of their mistakes, so they don’t > repeat something again as stupid and harmful to industry/web-development in > the future. > > kai zhu > [email protected] > > > > On 23 Aug 2018, at 1:22 PM, Jordan Harband <[email protected]> wrote: > > Kai, that makes no sense whatsoever, and isn't contributing productively > to this thread. Dependency resolution logic is platform-specific - in > browsers, it's "URLs", which I assume you understand, and in node using > babel, it's "the same as require", which I'd assume any node user would > understand. There's no relationship to "with" statements and no actual > difficulty "debugging" them that I'm aware of after using them for years. > > Please stay on topic, and keep to yourself comments that are nothing more > than random toxicity about the JS language. > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:12 AM, kai zhu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> es6 import-statements are effectively with-statements … >> >> actually, they're *async* with-statements, with no callback-handling and >> non-obvious dependency-resolution logic, for those of us trying to debug >> them when things go wrong. >> >> On Aug 22, 2018 15:58, "Claude Pache" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> > Le 21 août 2018 à 21:20, Herbert Vojčík <[email protected]> a écrit : >>> > >>> > Hi! >>> > >>> > It would be nice to know if do expressions have some a chance, >>> otherwise some other syntax for let-in would be really helpful, especially >>> now that we have arrow functions. >>> > >>> > I would propose to use different variant of let (maybe also const): >>> > >>> > OP 1: >>> > >>> > let in a = b(), if (a) a.c(); >>> > >>> > OP 2: >>> > >>> > let in a = b(), if (a) c(a); >>> > >>> > Instead of >>> > const big = raw => { >>> > let cooked = cook(raw); >>> > return consumer => { >>> > // do things with consumer and cooked >>> > }; >>> > }; >>> > >>> > const big = raw => >>> > let in cooked = cook(raw), consume => { >>> > // do things with consumer and cooked >>> > }; >>> > >>> > In short, >>> > >>> > let in binding = expr, stmt|expr >>> > >>> > It may work for `const in` as well. >>> > >>> > Herby >>> > >>> > P.S.: Alternative syntax is "let a=3, b=4, ..., in foo(a,b,c,d)" but >>> this can only tell late if it is plain let-up-to-end-of-scope or >>> local-scope-let, so not sure if that may be a problem; OTOH you can chain >>> more of them and resembles classical let-in better. >>> >>> Please, don’t take it too seriously: but have you thought about >>> resuscitating the (in)famous `with` statement? >>> >>> ```js >>> const big = raw => >>> do with ({cooked: cook(raw)}) >>> consumer => { >>> // do things with consumer and cooked >>> };; >>> ``` >>> >>> And no the two ”;”s are not a typo: I need to end both the `with` >>> statement and the `const` declaration. >>> >>> But more seriously... those sorts of “clever” syntaxes (`let-in` or >>> `do-with` or whatever), apart from complicating the language, are in danger >>> of raising as much issues than they’re resolving; the double-semicolon >>> oddity is one of them. >>> >>> —Claude >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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
