ES Discuss - Message History

Isaac Schlueter (2012-03-06T19:38:53.000Z)

Go to Source

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:53, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org> wrote:

> This approach requires a restriction: [no LineTerminator here] between the
> ) and the {:
>

Yes, I did put that in the OP, but it looks like my mail client helpfully
wrapped at that point, which is a bit confusing :)

Leaving out the f in the "definition" doesn't help, since (a,b,c) is a
> comma expression. The requirement is no LineTerminator between the ) and
> the {.
>

Yes, an identifier is required.  It would not be possible to define an
unnamed function in this way.



> Without a leading keyword, it's harder to find the functions. Not
> impossible, not saying this is a deal breaker. But it is harder.
>

Agreed. This was inspired by seeing some code in candor and dart, and
getting jealous of their nice terse functions :)  However, having not used
this style in real programs, it's hard to comment on whether it would
continue to be nice, or get annoying.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20120306/28f1df6a/attachment.html>

github at esdiscuss.org (2013-07-12T02:24:50.343Z)

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:53, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org> wrote:

> This approach requires a restriction: `[no LineTerminator here]` between the
> `)` and the `{`

Yes, I did put that in the OP, but it looks like my mail client helpfully wrapped at that point, which is a bit confusing :)

> Leaving out the `f` in the "definition" doesn't help, since `(a,b,c)` is a
> comma expression. The requirement is no `LineTerminator` between the `)` and
> the `{`.

Yes, an identifier is required.  It would not be possible to define an unnamed function in this way.

> Without a leading keyword, it's harder to find the functions. Not
> impossible, not saying this is a deal breaker. But it is harder.

Agreed. This was inspired by seeing some code in candor and dart, and getting jealous of their nice terse functions :)  However, having not used this style in real programs, it's hard to comment on whether it would continue to be nice, or get annoying.

Edit