Alternative syntax for <|

Andreas Rossberg rossberg at google.com
Wed Nov 16 11:29:36 PST 2011


On 16 November 2011 20:12, Erik Arvidsson <erik.arvidsson at gmail.com> wrote:
> One thing that all of these discussions are missing is the hoisting
> property of function and any possible future classes. If we use "let
> Point = ..." we lose all hoisting and the order of your declarations
> starts to matter and we will end up in the C mess where forward
> references do not work.

The order of let declarations does not matter for visibility. It is
perfectly fine to forward reference let, as long as it does not
immediately require the value. For example:

let x = {f: function() { return y;}}
let y = 5

In particular, this enables mutually recursive let definitions.

/Andreas


More information about the es-discuss mailing list