Semantics and abstract syntax of lambdas

Brendan Eich brendan at
Fri Dec 5 18:31:21 PST 2008

On Dec 5, 2008, at 6:20 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:

> Michael Day wrote:
>> Hi Brendan,
>>> Please read
>> There is a lot of discussion over whether it is necessary to  
>> introduce
>> syntax sugar instead of a "lambda" keyword, but is there any  
>> remaining
>> controversy over the semantics of lambdas in JavaScript, or is that
>> considered settled at this point?
> Semantic or abstract-syntax issues that are not settled include:

Your list of issues (snipped here to reduce context) is good, and  
should be reflected in the wiki. Cc'ing Dave.

> - how to avoid the hazard pointed out by Mark Miller where a value
>   can be unintentionally leaked from the tail position of a lambda;

Just to give credit where due, Waldemar was the Cassandra who  
prophesied this hazard ;-).

> The strawman page has suggested answers for some of these issues, but
> not all of them, and the answers given on that page are not fixed in
> stone.

That goes without saying -- the answers are fixed in straw! It's not  
stoneman:lambdas :-P.

Tradtionally one switches from straw to iron or a stronger metal. At  
least for Ada.


More information about the Es-discuss mailing list