January 19 meeting notes
rossberg at google.com
Mon Jan 23 02:28:50 PST 2012
On 20 January 2012 20:51, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com> wrote:
> This is a recurring discussion. The discussion always seems to resolve
> (perhaps with some unhappy acquiesce) that we want to follow the C++/Java/C#
> (and other similar language) precedent adjusted to deal with legacy var and
> function semantics.
Yes, I see the argument. Not sure I'm convinced by it, though, given
that blocks already have significantly different scoping rules than in
other curly braces languages. Moreover, it wouldn't _change_ anything
that was legal in these other languages, it would just allow more.
But it's a minor point.
More information about the es-discuss