Shorter syntax for arrow function assignment

Brian Blakely anewpage.media at gmail.com
Tue Oct 24 16:59:11 UTC 2017


As arrow function const assignments become the norm and non-arrows the
exception, allowing syntactical cruft to fall away makes sense to me.  It
might be premature based on overall 2015 adoption, but I don't see this
trend reversing.

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:54 PM, /#!/JoePea <joe at trusktr.io> wrote:

> It can be confusing because it is too similar to non-arrow functions. The
> arrow syntax is clear in meaning.
>
> */#!/*JoePea
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Brian Blakely <anewpage.media at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> This syntax is shorter, easier to write, and arguably easier to read.
>> What else does it need to offer?
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:48 PM, kai zhu <kaizhu256 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> -1
>>> this fails styleguide sanity-check.
>>>
>>> we currently have 3 common styles of declaring functions:
>>> 1. foo = function () {...}
>>> 2. function foo () {...}
>>> 3. foo = () => {...}
>>>
>>> does this extra 4th style offer anything new to justify making the
>>> javascript language even less consistent than it already is?  i say
>>> no.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/25/17, Brian Blakely <anewpage.media at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > A prevalent pattern has emerged:
>>> >
>>> > `export const foo = ()=> { };`
>>> >
>>> > Taking a cue from short method syntax, this comes to mind as a possible
>>> > improvement:
>>> >
>>> > `export const foo() { };`
>>> >
>>> > Even better if we assume const:
>>> >
>>> > `export foo() { };`
>>> >
>>> > That is delicious.  Thoughts?
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20171024/93603f04/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list