Breton Slivka wrote:
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Michael Day [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(1) Expression lambdas: lambdas whose body is an expression.
var x = lambda(y, z) y + z
Solves the problem with completion leakage, solves the nested
return/break/continue issue. However, quite
Jon Zeppieri wrote:
The only problem with the proto-proposal to limit lambda bodies to
expressions (which is otherwise a good idea) is that the ES expression
sub-language isn't powerful enough. The ternary expression is awful
for conditionals more complex than if a then b else c. Without a
Yuh-Ruey Chen wrote:
Eric Suen wrote:
Your proposal make nosense to me, first, I not sure what is your
strict mode means, because in strict mode there is no automatic
semicolon insertion.
No, semicolon insertion occurs also in strict mode. Perhaps it shouldn't.
Oops, I got this from:
Brendan Eich wrote:
On Dec 7, 2008, at 9:53 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
No, semicolon insertion occurs also in strict mode. Perhaps it shouldn't.
TC39 already agreed it should, for ES3.1. Strict mode has enough
migration-tax that we do not want to risk making it unused in practice
due to
Yuh-Ruey Chen wrote:
Breton Slivka wrote:
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Michael Day [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(1) Expression lambdas: lambdas whose body is an expression.
var x = lambda(y, z) y + z
Solves the problem with completion leakage, solves the nested
return/break/continue issue.
On Dec 8, 2008, at 9:48 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
Why? That would only happen if you added use strict; to a program
fragment
without testing that the resulting program still parses correctly,
Parses and executes over all paths correctly, you must mean.
which is
an obviously silly
6 matches
Mail list logo
