How about replacing <| with ->
xavierm02.net at gmail.com
Sun Mar 4 10:06:19 PST 2012
I'm not a native english speaker and I think both are the same when
Words allow people not knowing JS to kind of understand.
Symbols are shorter to write and are easier to spot when looking at code.
I'd prefer a symbol but I'm sure others would prefer a word (that's why
some operators became words in cofeescript).
So either we want all codes to look alike and we chose one of those two
options, or we want to let people chose and we add a word *and* a symbol.
Sent from my smartphone.
On Mar 4, 2012 6:53 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>
> > On Mar 4, 2012, at 9:18 AM, Herby Vojčík wrote:
> >> P.P.S.: I don't know what 'beget' means (I know I can find it, just to
> illustrate it's not a commonly known word).
> > I've had a concern about the possible impact of keyword choice on
> non-native English speakers who are trying to learn or use the language.
> Presumably, that is (or will be) the majority of ES developers.
> > Being a native English speaker, I don't have any direct experience with
> this (for ES ior other PLs). But we do have non-native speakers on this
> list and specific feed back from them would be interesting. However, I
> suspect that the non-native English followers of this list are probably, on
> average, much more fluent than the average non-natiive English web/Es
> > If you don't know the word, is it easier to learn a new symbol (eg <|)
> or a new keyword (eg beget)? Long term, does it make any cognitive
> As a native English speaker, even though I happen to know the word
> "beget", it's still quite strange. I would be confused when I first
> saw it. I prefer either a word that's closer to ES (like "protoFor"
> or something), or a symbol.
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss