lexical for-in/for-of loose end
brendan at mozilla.org
Tue Jan 31 11:11:31 PST 2012
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
> Oh, I'm perfectly happy to see the initializer eliminated (for the new syntax).
See followup. If we can try to reserve 'let' in non-strict code, we can
try to remove =i in for (var x=i in o). Why not make the attempt?
> But side-effects eradication, in general, seems like a wack-a-mole effort.
Clearly I've miscommunicated. I wasn't arguing against effects, only
against the extra expression option in a zero-iteration for-in
structure. There's no reason for it, it introduces non-trivial
complexity into some implementations, and it's a source of minor
mischief for code analysis.
More information about the es-discuss