July 25, 2012 - TC39 Meeting Notes
allen at wirfs-brock.com
Tue Aug 14 08:16:04 PDT 2012
On Aug 14, 2012, at 4:20 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
> On 29 July 2012 03:58, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org> wrote:
>> Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
>>> I really think in a language where we have both [[Put]] and
>>> [[DefineOwnProperty]] semantics that we really need both = and :=
>> I can buy that, and I'm glad you mention := as it is not just an assignment
>> operator (e.g. in Pascal or Ada), it's also Go's declare-and-init operator.
>> It has the right characters, fuzzy meaning from other languages, and the
>> critical = char in particular.
> There is a far longer tradition and a significantly larger body of
> languages that use = for definition and := for assignment (including
> all languages in the Algol & Pascal tradition). So going with an
> inverted meaning in JS sounds like an awful idea to me (as does using
> Go for inspiration about anything related to declaration syntax ;) ).
About as awful as using [ ] as the indexing operator when every FORTRAN programmer knows that ( ) is how you do subscripting. Not to mention what Smalltalk programmers think [ ] means.
There is value in using familiar looking symbols but I think it is unrealistic to expect common semantics among different languages.
More information about the es-discuss