Wow, thanks. I feel dumb for asking :D
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Sebastian McKenzie <sebmck at gmail.com>
wrote:
> The binding identifiers are optional. You can do what you want already
> with:
>
> const lastOfThree = ([,, third]) => {
> return third;
> }
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Elie Rotenberg <elie at rotenberg.io>
> wrote:
>
>> Using array destructuring assignment and constraining linting rules, I
>> often find myself having to chose names for bindings I don't intent on
>> using. I usually end up using a conventional ignore name, such as _ignore,
>> which I "void" to shut up the linter without adding exceptions. Besides the
>> linting problem (which can be solved by refining the linting rules), it's
>> still a conceptually useless binding.
>>
>> Here's a contrived example:
>>
>> const lastOfThree = ([first, second, third]) => third;
>>
>> Which I usually end up rewriting:
>>
>> const lastOfThree = ([_ignore1, _ignore2, third]) => {
>> void _ignore1;
>> void _ignore2;
>> return third;
>> }
>>
>> This problem doesn't exist when using objects, since only the fields
>> specified on the LHS are bound.
>>
>> I realize the bigger topic behind non-binding match is refutable pattern
>> matching, as per
>> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:pattern_matching, but
>> being able to dismiss a matched (or unmatched) value from a destructuring
>> assignment seems a very often desirable feature when programming in a
>> functional style (eg. working with lists represented as 2-element arrays).
>> Most functional-style languages have a non-binding matching feature.
>>
>> This topic has been discussed in the following topics:
>> - https://esdiscuss.org/topic/conditional-catch
>> - https://esdiscuss.org/notes/2014-07-30
>> - https://esdiscuss.org/topic/conditional-catch-clause
>>
>> Does anyone else feel the need for a specific means of dismissing a
>> binding from a destructuring assignment? Is pattern matching still on
>> discussion?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150429/4030f02f/attachment-0001.html>
Wow, thanks. I feel dumb for asking :D On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Sebastian McKenzie <sebmck at gmail.com> wrote: > The binding identifiers are optional. You can do what you want already > with: > > const lastOfThree = ([,, third]) => { > return third; > } > > > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Elie Rotenberg <elie at rotenberg.io> > wrote: > >> Using array destructuring assignment and constraining linting rules, I >> often find myself having to chose names for bindings I don't intent on >> using. I usually end up using a conventional ignore name, such as _ignore, >> which I "void" to shut up the linter without adding exceptions. Besides the >> linting problem (which can be solved by refining the linting rules), it's >> still a conceptually useless binding. >> >> Here's a contrived example: >> >> const lastOfThree = ([first, second, third]) => third; >> >> Which I usually end up rewriting: >> >> const lastOfThree = ([_ignore1, _ignore2, third]) => { >> void _ignore1; >> void _ignore2; >> return third; >> } >> >> This problem doesn't exist when using objects, since only the fields >> specified on the LHS are bound. >> >> I realize the bigger topic behind non-binding match is refutable pattern >> matching, as per >> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:pattern_matching, but >> being able to dismiss a matched (or unmatched) value from a destructuring >> assignment seems a very often desirable feature when programming in a >> functional style (eg. working with lists represented as 2-element arrays). >> Most functional-style languages have a non-binding matching feature. >> >> This topic has been discussed in the following topics: >> - https://esdiscuss.org/topic/conditional-catch >> - https://esdiscuss.org/notes/2014-07-30 >> - https://esdiscuss.org/topic/conditional-catch-clause >> >> Does anyone else feel the need for a specific means of dismissing a >> binding from a destructuring assignment? Is pattern matching still on >> discussion? >> >> Regards, >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150429/4030f02f/attachment-0001.html>