block lambda revival

Brendan Eich brendan at
Sat May 21 10:50:26 PDT 2011

On May 21, 2011, at 9:50 AM, Peter Michaux wrote:

> On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at> wrote:
>> On May 20, 2011, at 9:55 PM, Peter Michaux wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at> wrote:
>>>> An essential part of this proposal is a paren-free call syntax
>>> Why is that essential?
>> When I wrote essential, I was not claiming that there's a logical proof of necessity. Rather I was declaring that this strawman includes paren-free block-argument-bearing call expressions as an essential design element. Chopping it out chops down the whole strawman.
> I understand what you're writing above but I think that ties this
> proposed short syntax for functions (or lambdas) to something the
> arrow syntax is not tied to and so makes it a "do you like apples or
> oranges?" choice.

I'm doing integrated design, a particular usable salad. Good nutrition often requires "both" not "either or".

> In another thread, some people were suggesting {||}
> as an exact alternative to the thin arrow.

Yes, I cited the thread in the strawman. So what? Chopping proposals into little pieces does not help, we've seen this before.


More information about the es-discuss mailing list