herby at mailbox.sk
Sat Jan 28 03:16:45 PST 2012
Lasse Reichstein wrote:
> The argument here seems to be that the need for conditionally
> declaring properties of an object literal isn't happening often enough
> that it warrants an abstraction. (And that seems reasonable from what
> I've seen too).
The problem with this the process of discussion. This if-in-literal is
not an isolated proposal. It is part of a bigger thing:
The issue with bigger things is, they only get one type of response:
tl;dr (and I confess I do it myself :-( ).
If one tries to go in small steps and tries to get things in
feature-by-feature, he get a response of "who needs it?" (how many times
did I hear it). Yes, isolated, the feature seem of little use, but as a
part of a whole, its need is much more apparent. The only problem is,
"the whole" is tl;dr.
It seems there is no way to present something more complex. How to
present something bigger so it gets actually considered?
More information about the es-discuss