Toplevel 'let' binding can be left permanently uninitialized after an error

Jason Orendorff jason.orendorff at gmail.com
Wed Nov 29 16:16:36 UTC 2017


On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:13 AM, pacerier at gmail.com <pacerier at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Re "..in subscope" and "..relevant"; As repl's can be fixed by
> that---all snippets treated as curlybraced.
>

Hi everyone.

For those of you who weren't on this list three years ago, here's the rest
of the thread:
  https://esdiscuss.org/topic/toplevel-let-binding-can-be-left-permanently-
uninitialized-after-an-error

Ever-deeper-nested-blocks is one possible behavior for a repl, and it does
solve this problem by allowing you to shadow your broken `let x` with a
fresh one, after a typo. It has some other drawbacks, though; see Dave
Herman's post here:
  https://esdiscuss.org/topic/toplevel-let-binding-can-be-left-permanently-
uninitialized-after-an-error#content-12

-j
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20171129/3f9c1fd9/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list