Re: What’s the best name for keyword parameters?
allen at wirfs-brock.com
Mon Aug 6 16:04:18 PDT 2012
On Aug 6, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Rick Waldron wrote:
> On Monday, August 6, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
>>>>>>> There is a long history of TC39 naming things for internal use and those names never escaping to the common lexicon. I'm not sure it's a thing we need to (or even should) weigh in on via the spec.
>>>> I agree. It would still be nice if we could find a common way of talking about this pattern (*in* the common lexicon). With the additional ES.next support, it is bound to become even more popular. It can feel like bikeshedding, but I think good naming matters. For example, I’m thankful for the term IIFE.
>>> Ben Alman coined this, not the spec.
>> You are making my point!
>> Or are you saying that this kind of discussion (not *directly* related to the spec) is off-topic? But where else can you discuss this?
> I think here is a fine place to discuss things like that, but they may not be relevant to the spec. IIFE is not a thing that is explicitly specified, but instead the product of combining 3 specified things: grouping, function expression and invocation. Prior to that they were commonly called "self executing anonymous function" which isn't even correct, let alone part of the spec.
> I guess I'm just unclear about the motivation. I could say that the world should call fat-arrow functions "rocket routines", but then I'd be wrong if the spec still called them fat-arrow functions—regardless of whether or not I bothered to post it to es-discuss.
FWIW, the spec. currently calls these things "arrow functions".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss