JD Isaacks (2015-11-10T01:45:19.000Z)
forbes at lindesay.co.uk (2015-11-12T15:37:16.971Z)
Considering the proposals for both concise methods and the bind operator I think it would be a great addition to be able to use them together. I am already seeing a lot of this: ```js class Foo { bar = () => { // bound } buz() { // unbound } } ``` I think having the bind operator with a concise method makes things more uniform: ```js class Foo { ::bar() { // bound } buz() { // unbound } } ``` This would also allow for this to be using on object literals: ```js let foo = { ::bar() { // bound } buz() { // unbound } } ``` This would also make using recursion with concise functions feasible: ```js let fibonacci = { ::at(n) { if (n < 2) { return n; } return this.at(n-1) + this.at(n-2); } } fibonacci.at(7); // 13 ``` I am looking for a champion for this feature. Anybody interested?
forbes at lindesay.co.uk (2015-11-12T15:36:59.506Z)
Considering the proposals for both concise methods and the bind operator I think it would be a great addition to be able to use them together. I am already seeing a lot of this: ```js class Foo { bar = () => { // bound } buz() { // unbound } } ``` I think having the bind operator with a concise method makes things more uniform: ```js class Foo { ::bar() { // bound } buz() { // unbound } } ``` This would also allow for this to be using on object literals: ```js let foo = { ::bar() { // bound } buz() { // unbound } } ``` This would also make using recursion with concise functions feasible: ```js let fibonacci = { ::at(n) { if (n < 2) { return n; } return this.at(n-1) + this.at(n-2); } } fibonacci.at(7); // 13 ```js I am looking for a champion for this feature. Anybody interested?