strawman for the := operator

Allen Wirfs-Brock allen at
Thu Aug 9 15:15:34 PDT 2012

On Aug 9, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Herby Vojčík wrote:

> Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
>> On Aug 9, 2012, at 18:48 , Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at
>> <mailto:allen at>> wrote:
>>> There are irregularities around the edges such as when assignment auto
>>> defines a missing property but they are of minor importance if a
>>> programmer clearly understands where they are defining abstractions
>>> and where they are consuming abstractions.
>> Let’s, simplifyingly, call people who create abstractions “library
>> authors” and people who use abstractions “normal developers”. It does
>> make sense to give the latter group specialized tools that help them do
>> their work. But I’d like to take a step back and ask the following question.
> It's a very big simplification. There is no "normal developer" in any at least middle-sized project, imnsho. We are all "library authors" most of the time - we create abstractions.
> So I see the rest of the original post as not at all that strong as it may look.
> On the contrary, we should definitely help "abstraction writers" to be able to do their work with ease and, which is connected, to help "consumer developers" become "abstraction writers" more easily.

You beat me to it! Programs of even moderate size and complexity require abstraction.  Arguably that's what real programmers do.  If "library author" means "abstraction creators" then those are exactly the people we want to better support.

See the harmony goals including:

 Be a better language for writing:
complex applications;
libraries (possibly including the DOM) shared by those applications;

Provide syntactic conveniences for:
good abstraction patterns;
high integrity patterns;


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list