Proposal: syntactic sugar for extracting fields from objects

guest271314 guest271314 at gmail.com
Thu May 30 07:29:13 UTC 2019


Not a rule. Just an email to this board.

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 7:26 AM Григорий Карелин <grundiss at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm new to this community, so I'd appreciate if you clarify: is that your
> opinion or is it kind of rule written somewhere?
>
> чт, 30 мая 2019 г. в 09:59, guest271314 <guest271314 at gmail.com>:
>
>> > Wouldn't it be better to consolidate the decision? I mean as OP I vote
>> for `from`, but if majority will say they better like `x.{y, z}` I'll take
>> it.
>>
>> No. There should not be any prohibition as to the additions different
>> solutions to a single proposal. Neither proposal is "better" right now as
>> neither have been coded, tested, and if necessary, specified. A simple
>> majority does not mean correct or complete. The more approaches available
>> the more ability to compose the code from different perspectives,
>> outputting the same result; expanding the language both in syntax and reach
>> as to possible composition, without setting an arbitrary specification to a
>> single majority at only this point in time.
>>
>> The tersest have been able to achieve so far on a single line using an
>> immediately invoked arrow function and object rest which requires writing
>> the identifier twice.
>>
>> If part of the requirement for the proposal is terse code, following the
>> pattern of an immediately invoked arrow function if  ```=``` operator
>> between expressions ```()``` the arrow `>` and return value could be
>> omitted as being designated implicit immediately invoked arrow function
>> with default return value set from the destructured parameters, or
>> ```undefined``` set as value of target identifiers, or plain object
>> ```{}```, resulting in the syntax, within at least an object literal,
>> possibly preceded by spread syntax, will result in
>>
>> ```let obj = {otherData:'other
>> data',...(({firstName,lastName})=(user.profile)}```
>>
>> being equivalent to
>>
>> ```let obj = {otherData:'other
>> data',...(({firstName,lastName})=>({firstName,lastName}))(user.profile)}```
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 6:38 AM Григорий Карелин <grundiss at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Wouldn't it be better to consolidate the decision? I mean as OP I vote
>>> for `from`, but if majority will say they better like `x.{y, z}` I'll take
>>> it.
>>>
>>> чт, 30 мая 2019 г. в 06:35, guest271314 <guest271314 at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> > I think it's possible to find someone who will represent the will of
>>>> community.
>>>>
>>>> Individuals can compose the code right now.
>>>>
>>>> > At the moment the question is does community have will to add
>>>> proposed sugar to the language, and if so, which version.
>>>>
>>>> Why would there be any restriction on the versions of syntax which
>>>> would achieve the requirement? The original proposal using ```from``` and
>>>> other proposals could each be created, tested, specified.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 7:37 PM Григорий Карелин <grundiss at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> True
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it's possible to find someone who will represent the will of
>>>>> community.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the moment the question is does community have will to add proposed
>>>>> sugar to the language, and if so, which version.
>>>>>
>>>>> ср, 29 мая 2019 г. в 22:30, Oriol _ <oriol-bugzilla at hotmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want to add this you will need a champion, see
>>>>>> https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#new-feature-proposals
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Oriol
>>>>>>
>>>>>> El 29/5/19 a les 21:15, Григорий Карелин ha escrit:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, what does community think? Do we want to have “destructuring
>>>>>> picking” sugar in JS and if we do, which syntax looks more attractive?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I’d suggest to vote.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Отправлено с мобильного устройства
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> es-discuss mailing listes-discuss at mozilla.orghttps://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> es-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>>>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> С уважением,
>>>>> Карелин Григорий
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> es-discuss mailing list
>>>>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> С уважением,
>>> Карелин Григорий
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> es-discuss mailing list
>>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>>
>>
>
> --
> С уважением,
> Карелин Григорий
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190530/c315dc05/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list