Novel operator syntax

Brendan Eich brendan at
Tue Oct 29 13:31:37 PDT 2013

Tristan Zajonc wrote:
> What about +:?  This actually has some visual appeal if primary 
> motivation is elementwise operations and is a syntax error with that 
> ASI example.  The downside is that it can end up pretty close to 
> existing syntax like {a+:1} vs. {a:+1}, although I don't expect that 
> to be a common use.

Yeah, that could work. We're unlikely to use : as a prefix operator due 
to ?:, and even less likely (as in 0) as an infix operator (note: not 
type annotation separator in declarations) due to labels.


More information about the es-discuss mailing list