`_` is better than `,` because `_` is the closest thing possible to empty
space, it could. It could even be represented as empty space when it's written
down, and it could come at the beginning or at the end, it's also more
appropriate for repeatation, `__` is more appropriate than `,,`.
________________________________
From: Ron Buckton <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 3, 2019 2:12:23 PM
To: Ed Saleh <[email protected]>; Sanford Whiteman
<[email protected]>; es-discuss <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Optional Curly Braces in JavaScript
The '_' isn't necessary for chaining expressions, as ',' would already suffice:
```
if (foo==2)
bar(),
bar2();
```
Also, '_' is already a valid expression/identifier.
While I'm not generally a fan of eliding braces from everything, I have
expressed interest in evaluating something like C#'s expression-bodied methods
for ECMAScript:
```
class C extends B {
constructor(arg) => super(arg, true);
toString() => `prop: ${this.prop}`;
get prop() => this.x + this.y;
}
```
________________________________
From: es-discuss <[email protected]> on behalf of Ed Saleh
<[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 3, 2019 10:48:12 AM
To: Sanford Whiteman <[email protected]>; es-discuss
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Optional Curly Braces in JavaScript
Update to the proposal:
Since we can't make spaces in JavaScript, the best we can do is use '_' instead.
We will also git rid of ':' after statement in the old version as '_' is enough
indication and it's more compatible with our current curly braces syntax.
Final result:
```
if (foo==2) _
bar() _
bar2()
```
Which is the same as:
```
if (foo==2)
_ bar();
_ bar2();
```
Basically `_` would allow chaining expressions inside a statement block.
Thank you,
________________________________
From: es-discuss <[email protected]> on behalf of Sanford Whiteman
<[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 3, 2019 1:36:36 AM
To: es-discuss <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Optional Curly Braces in JavaScript
> the only thing really missing (and which python has) is a builtin
> wasm-sqlite3 library (and specialized/secure file-api's to persist
> sqlite-db-blobs).
Browsers (WPWG, not this group) tried WebSQL. It failed because there
wasn't a competitive bake-off with any other implementations _besides_
SQLite.
If a browser vendor had used another engine, then SQLite might've won
the bake-off and now you'd have what you describe.
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.mozilla.org%2Flistinfo%2Fes-discuss&data=02%7C01%7Cron.buckton%40microsoft.com%7Ccd21f3779f7048233ae208d7608e6651%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637084037245292578&sdata=JJw55TjIz4sGGTrtDFRSeLZm%2FA1KHge%2B3l7dWW16eko%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
