bruant.d at gmail.com
Tue Feb 7 13:28:17 UTC 2017
Le 06/02/2017 à 17:59, Ryan Birmingham a écrit :
> 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
> 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.
Proposals to change the standard are listed here :
The process for a feature to become standard is described here :
> * How do you usually approach or avoid this issue?
> * Do you think we should look at improving and standardizing the
> comprehension syntax?
Some might argue it is yet another instance of "superficial sugar
obsession"  :-p I don't know where I stand personally.
In any case, if you want to start, write down a proposal (can be 20
lines in a gist ) including programs that are hard to express in
the new syntax.
Perhaps submit it to the mailing-list and try to find a "TC39 champion"
(criterion to enter stage 1).
At the very least, the proposal will be listed in the stage 0 proposals
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss