please add x .= f()

Soni L. fakedme+es at gmail.com
Mon Aug 10 20:57:56 UTC 2015


Welp I keep replying this wrong (how should I configure my email client?)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

It /could/ in theory be used like this:

function path(s) {
   if (s.charAt(0) == '/') { s.=substring(1); }
   // your stuff here
}

On 10/08/15 04:50 PM, Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
> not only it's badly readable and reminds me the PHP string concatenation,
> but it promotes different type assignment which is a performance, and 
> virtually strongly typed, anti-pattern.
>
> I think Brendan said already it all, the proposal is badly described, 
> and it solve pretty much nothing in the real world.
>
> Probably we can just move on and ignore the list of -1 we'll all put 
> in? ;-)
>
> Best Regards
>
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 8:46 PM, <myemailum14 at gmail.com 
> <mailto:myemailum14 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Please no, while i can see how logically it's derived from a = a + 1
>
>     a = a.f()
>
>     a .= f()
>
>     seems like a bad idea
>
>     i can hardly see the dot
>     why would i replace the object from which i'm calling the method
>     in most cases looks inefficient
>
>
>     On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org
>     <mailto:brendan at mozilla.org>> wrote:
>
>         Do not send "Please add" messages with two-line, half-baked
>         sketches of extensions to the language. That's just injecting
>         noise with very little signal.
>
>         The "-1" you received will be the answer if pressed from
>         everyone on TC39, I would bet real money. Syntax is expensive,
>         adding it for little semantic gain and some downside
>         user-confusion risk (plus a small complexity tax hike for the
>         language in full) is never the right answer.
>
>         That you can scratch this itch (and many others like it) via
>         sweet.js does not argue for incorporating any such =. or .=
>         operator into the core language. Analyze developer patterns
>         and nearby languages for better candidate extensions that
>         solve more serious usability or greater issues.
>
>         /be
>
>
>         Florent FAYOLLE wrote:
>
>             Hello,
>
>                 x .= f() should be syntax sugar for x = x.f()
>
>                 x .= f().g().h() should be x = x.f().g().h()
>
>
>             +1! I've made some weeks ago a prototype of this in sweet.js:
>             https://github.com/fflorent/member-access-assignment
>
>             Except that the syntax is rather =. (I have probably been
>             influenced by the CoffeeScript's existential operator).
>             The reverse looks fine to me too.
>
>                 -1 Please no :)
>
>             Why?
>
>             Florent
>             _______________________________________________
>             es-discuss mailing list
>             es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
>             https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         es-discuss mailing list
>         es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
>         https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     es-discuss mailing list
>     es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
>     https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

-- 
Disclaimer: these emails are public and can be accessed from <TODO: get a non-DHCP IP and put it here>. If you do not agree with this, DO NOT REPLY.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150810/498d1955/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list