On Jan 3, 2008, at 11:41 AM, Igor Bukanov wrote:
> So one way or another the symmetry is broken meaning an extra
> complexity for the implementations and extra rules for a user to
> learn.
This asymmetry exists with let declarations vs. blocks/expressions:
// outer x may be bound here
{
... // but cannot be used here
let x = f(x); // or here as the argument to f
// x's default value is used instead
...
}
vs.
let (x = f(x)) { // x in f(x) finds outer x binding
... // here x is in scope throughout the
// block (or expression if let expr)
}
This discussion brings the existing asymmetry to light, magnifies it
via function's body, with its own scope(s). I'm not saying we should
add (let (function f()...) ...) etc. just because of the existing,
intentional asymmetry. But more asymmetry of the same kind is not
obviously fatal either.
The case for (let (const C ...) ...) seems stronger in any event.
/be
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
