arrow syntax unnecessary and the idea that "function" is too long
Dmitry A. Soshnikov
dmitry.soshnikov at gmail.com
Sun May 15 13:54:45 PDT 2011
On 16.05.2011 0:40, Brendan Eich wrote:
> On May 15, 2011, at 11:56 AM, Dmitry A. Soshnikov wrote:
>> Oh, and just a small note -- perhaps there's a sense to put a comment near each line to what result the expression evaluates in your examples, e.g.
>> asset(p === q); // true (or false?)
> That is confusing and pointless. I meant what I wrote. The assertions are intended to claim that their argument conditions are truthy.
Yeah, OTOH, yes.
> See last reply for more on joining. It occurs to me you thought scope chain varying in the context of a pure hash-rocket such as #->42 means that function cannot be joined, but since it is pure, it need not entrain its scope chain as an internal [[Scope]] property.
> More, since # freezes, there's no need for it to be duplicated, since there is no mutation side channel.
> So http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:arrow_function_syntax proposes freezing and joining, only if the user specifies via the # prefix.
Yep, I got it, thanks, though, as mentioned seems it can be managed then
at engine level without explicit specifying by the user, no?
More information about the es-discuss