arrow function syntax simplified

[Axel Rauschmayer]

> Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
>> My bad. It is, minus [[Construct]] and *.prototype. I misremembered how bind() works.
>> 
>> On Mar 30, 2012, at 0:01 , Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
>> 
>>> Interesting. So x => x * x is not just syntactic sugar for
>>> 
>>>     function (x) { return x * x }.bind(this)

On Mar 31, 2012, at 2:54 , Brendan Eich wrote:

> We do not want to delegate to a target function that can [[Construct]], because there is no such target function -- we're not trying to sugar .bind on a full function. That is too expensive and general (no pre-args, no full function under the hood).


Ah, good. But one can use the above (pseudo-)desugaring to predict the behavior of arrow functions, right? That is, there is no observable difference.

-- 
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
axel at rauschma.de

home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20120401/1610848e/attachment.html>