khs4473 at gmail.com
Mon Dec 10 06:27:33 PST 2012
> I consider such second-guessing of user intention, which can lead one
> construct to mean completely different things, harmful. It makes code
> less readable and more brittle. And again, it's a semantic hack,
> making the language more complex. I just don't see why it would be
> worth it, especially since with the right choice of syntax, the two
> forms of declaration can easily be made equally concise.
> What's so terrible about using different constructs for different
> things that you want to avoid it?
I have an intuition (which may be a holdover from CommonJS modules) that a
module is a kind of "function" which "returns" either a single binding or a
set of named bindings, and the dual-use syntax matches that intuition.
But I agree it's conceptually more tidy with two distinct forms.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss