Default operator strawman - ||| rather than ??

[Herby Vojčík]

Brendan Eich wrote:
>> In fact, I don't think I was pushing any particular syntax. I think I
>> was clear about asking _whether_ people saw value in the semantics of
>> it, not the syntax. It's fine if people don't see value; is there a
>> problem with asking the question?
>
> I was describing the hazards of adding syntax that "wouldn't hurt".
> Syntax should be added only when it clearly helps:
>
> * It brings new semantics not expressible in the language (let, const,
> modules, generators).
> * It is an affordance without new semantics for a common pattern that's
> verbose and error-prone when open-coded.

I'm from different school of thinking which is probably very incovenient 
in spec-thinking. But I feel strongly that there should be one more 
category:
* It is an affordance with very little or no new semantic for an 
uncommon pattern which by its formalizing and makes "godel-accessible" 
(in the sense "comprehensible by one's mind") space covered by the 
language much greater.
(I'm talking about mixins / traits, mustache+richer data semantics, ...
Things that can be done, but the price is hard, so they are not used. 
But that goes directly against "paving the cowpath" and "no novelties". 
Basically what I am advocating here probably are novelties. :-/ )

> /be