{Spam?} Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Andrea Giammarchi andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com
Thu Sep 11 01:27:24 PDT 2014


for record sake, this is my complain on missingn -> better explained:
https://gist.github.com/qubyte/43e0093274e793cc82ba#comment-1292183

Rick kindly ensured me that it will be discussed for ES7, I see that too
late for such little improvement able to cover 100% of use cases (
including `((x)->x)).bind(ctx)` )

Not sure what to do to make it happen sooner.

Best Regards


On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Andrea Giammarchi <
andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com> wrote:

> but only one made it ... I am not comparing but many developers are
> already confused about fat not behaving like thin.
>
> Yes, thin should be part of ES6 ... it's way easier to spec as just
> regular anonymous `function` shortcut , I still don't understand why it has
> been left out.
>
> The `function` AFAIK was the boring/too long problem to sugar, we've got 3
> other ways to define it in other flavors and yet not a shortcut as thin
> arrow would simply be.
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 2:21 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org> wrote:
>
>> Alex Kocharin wrote:
>>
>>> > Everybody else that used to pass a different context to do something
>>> more meaningful
>>> Does anyone really do that? Except for fine-tuning performance? As far
>>> as I remember, people either use closures or .bind() stuff.
>>>
>>
>> Yup.
>>
>> Andrea, if you want -> (which you do) can you kindly stop complaining
>> that => is not ->? That's like saying blue cheese is bad because it isn't
>> cheddar. Both are great!
>>
>> /be
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20140911/5af1d07e/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list