weakref proposal update

This is just a heads up that the WeakRefs *presentation* has been updated with the improved API and semantics, based on various issues and discussions from the first version of the proposal. The new version is updated in place and is still at:

Re: Function composition vs pipeline

Straw man. The problem is variables named h, f and g, not the use of a composition operator. On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 at 07:37, kai zhu wrote: > @peter, put yourself in the shoes of a senior-programmer responsible > for overseeing an entire web-project. the project is @ the >

Re: Function composition vs pipeline

All good points :-) I wasn't suggesting there's no cost to adding syntax to a language; I was suggesting that kai's blanket "please don't add new syntax because I don't want to have to deal with it in my project" isn't a useful objection on its own. On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:59 AM, Mark Miller

Re: Function composition vs pipeline

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:33 PM, Jordan Harband wrote: > As someone who does wear the shoes of a senior programmer responsible > (along with my team) for overseeing a very very large web project, the > super trivial and easy answer to this is "use a linter" - eslint can be >

Re: Function composition vs pipeline

As someone who does wear the shoes of a senior programmer responsible (along with my team) for overseeing a very very large web project, the super trivial and easy answer to this is "use a linter" - eslint can be configured to restrict any syntax you like, and since surely your CI process is