Generator issue: exceptions while initializing arguments
khs4473 at gmail.com
Thu Sep 13 05:54:31 PDT 2012
> My point is serious, in that we are not bound to follow C, C++, or Java
> and try to separate formal parameter scope, default parameter
> initialization, or other observables from those languages, just because of
> that left curly brace at the start of a function body.
Yeah - but the argument against doesn't lean on those other languages. It
leans on the fact that curly braces signal scope boundaries (in a
symbolic-human-conceptual way), except when they don't. Minimizing the
number of exceptions to that rule minimizes confusion.
On the other hand, thinking of default expressions as "belonging" to the
function body ends up being cleaner overall and wins, I think, for me. But
any documentation we create on this language feature will need to be
painfully explicit about the scope rules.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss