es-discuss Digest, Vol 51, Issue 5

Thaddee Tyl thaddee.tyl at gmail.com
Sat May 7 09:16:20 PDT 2011


I believe that David Bruant has a good point. We *need* a shorter syntax
because we advocate the use of map/reduce, etc., which require simple
anonymous functions.

As to why we should choose # rather than coffescript's ->, there are two points:

- The # syntax is more readable. -> is perlish. It looks like two very
much used operands, "minus" and "greater than",
without any related meaning.
Python, which has an enormous emphasis on readability,
is ready to add the ':' at the end of the line before each block to
make it readable.
Here, greater readability is on par with a decrease in the number of
characters needed.
- I talked to Alex Russell about this, and his answer was:
"Arrow requires recursive descent, fat arrow just passes the buck on
bind. Not settled."
This seems like an interesting issue that makes the # syntax even more
agreeable.

As to comment on Kyle Simpson's raised issue, it is true that this
channel lacks web developers' intervention.
I am a simple web developer myself. I must admit most developers don't
sign up to this mailing list
because it can be complex to handle (lot of stuff to read) and there
is no tl;dr. As such, the "voting poll" idea
isn't absurd. If done well, on the ecmascript's webpage, and with ads
on Mozilla's mdn, it can give an interesting
estimate of how popular it would be...
On the other hand, it cannot be safe. People would vote without
digging deep enough into why such proposal is
nice to have. As a result, we can't promise that the result of the
poll will be chosen by the committee.


More information about the es-discuss mailing list