kdex at kdex.de
Fri Sep 1 12:06:38 UTC 2017
Ah, I see where you're coming from now. Thanks for the clarification!
There has recently been some discussion about the semantics of `|>` in .
I think what you're looking for is , perhaps?
On Friday, September 1, 2017 1:52:31 PM CEST Peter van der Zee wrote:
> > Sorry, but your message looks very opinionated and I can't seem to find
> > any
> objective reasoning in there.
> Nah, you might be thrown off by the different grammar ;)
> Thing is, `|>` would introduce a new way of calling a function in a
> way that is not at all in line with how functions are called in JS.
> That means JS devs won't easily recognize `a |> b` as easily as they
> do `b(a)`. (Also consider less text-book-y examples here please...)
> You might argue that this will be a transitional period and I will
> counter you with an existential question; Why at all? What does this
> solve? And is it worth the cognitive overhead?
> I think this is a bad addition to the language. One that doesn't "fit"
> with how the language currently works. And one that will lead to many
> devs being thoroughly confused when confronted with this.
> But, I'm not asking you to take my opinion on it. Research it. Please
> do some research on this. Reach out to devs of all types (not just
> react devs, not just functional programmers, not just vanilla JS
> coders, not just code golfers, and definitely not just people on the
> TC39) and figure out how they will respond when confronted with
> additions like this. And please post those results here. I don't mind
> being wrong. As long as you can back those claims up when introducing
> something like this.
> - peter
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the es-discuss