"Pretty" function expression names

[Michael Haufe]

I apologize if this double posts, my other mail client seems a bit finicky.

P T Withington wrote:

> Assuming we're allowed to speculate on futures here...

>

> I was thinking about improving debug-ability by adding descriptive names
to function expressions thusly,

>

>   var myFun = function "my description here" (...) { ... };

>

>I.e., be able to use an arbitrary string as the "name" of a function
expression.  It seems to me this would be an unambiguous extension, only
giving up an unlikely syntax error.  >No runtime is required to do anything
with the name, although it would be encouraged to make it available as the
.name property of the function object.  Comments?