ljharb at gmail.com
Tue Jul 4 18:50:24 UTC 2017
To me it seems like minmax is *less* readable - between repeating the RHS
(with min and max) vs condensing them and having nonobvious LHS syntax
(with minmax), I'd prefer the current situation.
On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Xavier Stouder <xavier at stouder.io> wrote:
> Even if I think it should be a performance improvement, the main goal
> actually is to improve readability and conciseness of the code.
> When you say “I'd expect it to be something closer to [min, max] =
> Math.minMax(foo, bar)”, are you saying that minmax (or minMax) should only
> take two arguments ? I think that if it’s implemented like this, it would
> obviously be not so usefull.
> Some questions about the proposal process :
> - Are champions reading and commenting this feed ? Can we have a
> comment on this proposal maybe ?
> - Is the purpose of proposals to question how the proposal would
> be implemented by JS engines ?
> - Talking about tests previously quoted : Is an JS
> implementation of this proposal just approaching how efficient (or not)
> would be the proposal after being implemented by JS engines ?
> Thanks for your feedback.
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss