Partial Expression proposal

Mike Samuel mikesamuel at gmail.com
Thu Dec 28 19:55:49 UTC 2017


Maybe take a shortish but non-trivial piece of code, rewrite it to use the
proposed syntax.  Then explain what about the rewritten code makes it
clearer, more maintainable, etc. than the code before.


On Dec 28, 2017 2:44 PM, "Tamás Halasi" <trusted.tomato at gmail.com> wrote:

How could we find out whether the feature is desirable? Just find a lot of
use cases? Or write a *Purpose* paragraph?

2017-12-28 20:29 GMT+01:00 Mike Samuel <mikesamuel at gmail.com>:

> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Tamás Halasi <trusted.tomato at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Damn.
> > I wonder why is that useful.
> > But whatever.
> >
> > What symbol do you think would be the best?
> > A binary operator have to have an expression at its left side, so *, /,
> %,
> >>, <, &, ^ or | might be good.
>
> If we focused on whether the feature set is desirable given the
> balance of existing features and use cases,
> we could later bikeshed after we're informed enough to weigh the
> benefit vs cost of consuming available punctuation.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20171228/4aa815db/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list