block lambda proposal in light of compiling to JavaScript

Mark S. Miller erights at google.com
Sat Jun 18 13:16:52 PDT 2011


On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Peter Michaux <petermichaux at gmail.com>wrote:
[...]

> So what can be done to help move the block lambda proposal towards Harmony?
>

Accumulating more arguments in its favor, as you are attempting to do in
this thread, and answering arguments against. The gate is achieving
consensus among the committee, and the only way through the gate is to
convince committee members that lambdas are a good idea. There is no
shortcut around that.

Btw, here's another point in favor that I just posted in the quasis thread:

Since the only TCP problems in JS *Expressions* are "this" and "arguments",
prohibiting "arguments" and binding "this" [to thunkify an expression in an
expansion] takes care of all TCP problems. [...] If we extend JS to allow
statements within expressions, then we'll [lose this pleasant
expression-thunkification technique]. Indeed, I would argue that we should
only allow statements in expressions if we chose lambda over arrow
functions, in order to avoid multiplying TCP problems.



-- 
    Cheers,
    --MarkM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20110618/5a0e85ce/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list