arrow function syntax simplified

Waldemar Horwat waldemar at google.com
Thu Oct 25 22:02:01 UTC 2018


On 10/25/2018 07:55 AM, manuelbarzi wrote:
> not focussing on aesthetics, but on reduce of bureaucracy, which not by coincidence it's something fat-arrow functions already provide.

The committee has been swamped with numerous such syntax proposals.  While any single one may be reasonable in isolation, each one adds significant complexity to the language, and the sum of them is too great (plus multiple proposals try to grab the same syntax for different purposes).

You will not be able to deprecate `function`, as that's just not web-compatible.  Given the existing two syntaxes for defining functions (function and =>), creating a third one would just add complexity.

     Waldemar


More information about the es-discuss mailing list