arrow syntax unnecessary and the idea that "function" is too long
getify at gmail.com
Fri May 6 23:02:37 PDT 2011
> Many people, including me, would disagree. On matters of taste, I'd want
> the committee to listen to all interested parties and try to pick the
> solution that pleases the most people. That appears to be what's happening
Based on what evidence are "we" concluding that the majority of the
coffeescript is the hot buzzword? Was there some developer-community wide
voting or poll that I missed? Or is it that a few vocal people on these
lists like it, and that's being substituted as what the "majority" is in
I'm not just being snarky, I'm genuinely curious, on this and a variety of
other matters related to what's being added to ES-next/harmony... It's clear
Brendan (and other language cohorts) likes these new syntax sugars, but
where is the evidence that suggests that all this new syntax sugar is the
at JSConf likes it, and thus that means that the whole community is assumed
to be on board?
there's also plenty of examples of where writing less is much more uglier. I
am troubled by the implication that just because we've found a shorter
syntax sugar for functions, this unequivocally means it's better.
-> syntax being shorter is a clear and objective question. No doubt it's
shorter. But is is prettier or more readable? According to who's opinion do
we conclude that, because that seems pretty subjective.
More information about the es-discuss