On 11/28/2018 10:17 AM, Andrew Kaiser wrote:
Hi all,
I have created a short proposal to introduce syntactic sugar for anonymous
functions in a 'scala-like' manner, linked here
https://github.com/andykais/proposal-placeholder-syntax.
I am hoping to hear feedback on whether or not this is interesting to people,
as well as feedback on the proposal itself (e.g. is there a better operator to
use than ` * `)
This is error-prone:
const sum = numbers.reduce(? + ?)
transforms into
const sum = numbers.reduce((x, y) => x + y)
but then:
const identity = numbers.reduce(?)
transforms into
const identity = (x) => numbers.reduce(x)
instead of the analogous
const identity = numbers.reduce((x) => x)
And what would
const z = numbers.reduce(? + ? > 0)
or
const z = numbers.reduce(2*(? + ?))
or
const z = numbers.reduce(foo(? + ?))
transform into?
Waldemar
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
