Function syntax

Nathan Stott nrstott at gmail.com
Thu May 19 12:44:29 PDT 2011


(Sorry for the previous empty message)

Having worked a lot with C#, my experience was that very very few
people used the C# 2.0 delegate syntax and now a large portion of the
community learned and uses the C# 3.0 syntax.  Syntax matters.

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Nathan Stott <nrstott at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Bob Nystrom <rnystrom at google.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:46 AM, David Griffiths <dxgriffiths at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> For all the talk about what's "usable" and "readable", I haven't seen much
>>> mention of empirical testing done with ordinary people... (My sincere
>>> apologies if there's some usability test lab for middlingly intelligent
>>> JavaScripters that I'm not aware of).
>>
>> That data is out there in the context of C#. C# 2.0 used this syntax for
>> local functions:
>>   delegate(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
>> In C# 3.0, they added:
>>   (x, y) => x + y
>> Aside from the type annotations, those almost perfectly mirror the current
>> discussion for JS. A motivated person could do some archeology of open
>> source code to find out how much each is being used. I was doing a lot of C#
>> when 3.0 came out and watched a number of people learn the new syntax. It
>> generally went like:
>> 1. Lambdas? Never heard of them.
>> 2. What is this weird arrow thing? I don't like it.
>> 3. Eh, I kind of understand what's going on, but it seems fishy.
>> 4. Hey this is pretty terse.
>> 5. OMG, working with collections is a breeze now! I just chained five maps
>> and filters!
>> 6. How did I ever live without this?
>> - bob
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>
>>
>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list