See here: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:destructuring and
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/JavaScript/New_in_JavaScript/1.7#Destructuring_assignment_%28Merge_into_own_page.2Fsection%29
Anton
On 3 January 2013 07:26, anders elo and...@kaerus.com wrote:
I'd like to
On Wednesday, June 27, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Isaac Schlueter wrote:
I don't think that's a real problem. Can you point to in-the-wild
bugs caused by this? Maybe it's a failure of imagination on my part.
Not sure if it's relevant but based on feedback I receive spotting typoed
variables is one
While I enjoyed this presentation (and I emotionally agree with the
frustration) it was factually very misleading. Zed made it seem like W3C/TC39
aren't working on any of his suggested improvements at all while what he meant
(according to his and Yehuda's Twitter conversation) is that stable
Hi,
When Angus first published his blog post some people got the impression that
we're trying to either discredit TC39 and its efforts, or to replace it with
our own committee. We value TC39 and feel like they are doing a great job and
we have absolutely no interest in starting another
On Monday, June 4, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote:
It's too late for jQuery to fix the order now. However, in the face of arrows
or bound functions, we probably could detect a user intent to use `this` for
their own purposes and use that as a signal to change the order.
If I read
FWIW, I tried very hard to come up with an example but failed. If I understand
it correctly fat arrow acts is a helper for `var self = this`. Then it no
matter what the underlying method does the following code will simply ignore
`this`:
var self = this;
DOM.each(div, function (el) {
I have a question. Here (https://gist.github.com/9a6d60e9c15ac4239b3d) I took a
piece of existing boilerplate code and rewrote it using the new syntax. However
on L18 I have data-disqus-id that cannot be used on a left hand side of
assignment. What's a preferred way to deal with this? Move it
Thanks. I've updated my gist. I personally think that Rick's suggestion works
better in this case because it makes the whole tree of properties more visible.
But, at this point, it's just a styling issue.
Anton
On Wednesday, May 30, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
On Wed, May 30,
FWIW I don't think it's even possible to use JSLint and 'with'. The parser just
quits as if it was a syntax error.
Anton
On Tuesday, May 29, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:
John Tamplin wrote:
2) I had legacy code using with.
You probably want to rewrite such code even if
Hi,
Since David Bruant mentioned JSFixed here let me just say that our intent is
not to fight with TC39 (that'd be silly) but to cooperate with it. I try hard
to keep people from pitchforking; instead I want them to share their pain
points.
I personally[1] think that TC39 does a pretty good
My two cents. A little over a year ago, I went over our JavaScript code here at
Disqus and made sure that 99% of it is in strict mode. This was definitely a
code cleanup aiming at catching variable leaks and other small bugs.
--
Anton Kovalyov
Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com
11 matches
Mail list logo
