Array Comprehensions

[T.J. Crowder]

Given `Array.prototype.filter`, `Array.prototype.map`, and other utilities
you can create combined with arrow functions, what is it about using syntax
for this instead that draws you? For me, the syntax doesn't add any
expressiveness, e.g. I don't see that this:

```js
const numbers = [1, 2, 3];
const doubled = [for (i of numbers) i * 2];
```

is any more expressive than

```js
const numbers = [1, 2, 3];
const doubled = numbers.map(i => i * 2);
```

> How do you usually approach or avoid this issue?

I use `filter`, `map`, and such.

> Do you think we should look at improving and standardizing the
comprehension syntax?

I don't see much percentage in it, FWIW, barring hearing more about the
motivations for having it.

-- T.J.

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Ryan Birmingham <rainventions at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I frequently find myself desiring a short array or generator comprehension
> syntax. I'm aware that there are functional ways around use of
> comprehension syntax, but I personally (at least) love the syntax in the ES
> reference (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/
> Reference/Operators/Array_comprehensions).
>
> The best previous discussion on this that I found was six years old (
> https://esdiscuss.org/topic/array-comprehensions-shorter-syntax) and
> answers some of my questions, raising others. That said, I wanted to ask:
>
>    - Why is the Comprehension Syntax in the reference yet not more
>    standard? It feels almost like a tease.
>    - How do you usually approach or avoid this issue?
>    - Do you think we should look at improving and standardizing the
>    comprehension syntax?
>
>
> Thank you all for humoring me,
>
> -Ryan Birmingham
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20170206/f84e6b05/attachment.html>