Thank you T.J. Crowder for giving me your opinion on this proposal.
I didn't know about the Bob Myers' for pick notation and it isn't bad.

I still prefer something like that:
```js
constructor(this.{par1, par2, par3}) {
}
```

but this doesn't sound bad to me:

```js
constructor(par1, par2, par3) {
    this.{} = {par1, par2, par3};
}
```

There is still a repetition, but it is a a step forward.

Il giorno gio 29 nov 2018 alle ore 12:28 T.J. Crowder <
tj.crowder at farsightsoftware.com> ha scritto:

> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 6:33 PM Simo Costa
> <andrysimo1997 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > So my proposal is to avoid those repetitions...
>
> I'm a bit surprised to find that no one's mentioned Bob Myers'
> [proposal][1] for pick notation yet, which would readily address this
> requirement *and* various other requirements beyond initializing
> newly-constructed objects.
>
> Using Bob's current draft syntax, Simo's example would be:
>
> ```js
> constructor(par1, par2, par3) {
>     this.{par1, par2, par3} = {par1, par2, par3};
> }
> ```
>
> or if the constructor accepts an object:
>
> ```js
> constructor(options) {
>     this.{par1, par2, par3} = options;
> }
> ```
>
> But I think we can go further if we tweak the syntax a bit. Perhaps:
>
> ```js
> constructor(par1, par2, par3) {
>     this.{} = {par1, par2, par3};
> }
> ```
>
> ...where the property names are inferred from the properties on the
> right-hand side. That would be functionally equivalent to:
>
> ```js
> constructor(par1, par2, par3) {
>     Object.assign(this, {par1, par2, par3});
> }
> ```
>
> ...but since the syntax is clear about the intent, when an object
> initializer (rather than just object reference) is used on the right-hand
> side it's an optimization target if a constructor is "hot" enough to
> justify it (e.g., an engine could optimize it into individual assignments).
>
> For me, that would be a great, clear, concise feature, and hits the other
> use cases Bob mentions in his proposal. I like that I'm still in control of
> what parameters get assigned as properties (which I think has been true of
> all of the suggestsions in this thread).
>
> -- T.J. Crowder
>
> [1]: https://github.com/rtm/js-pick-notation
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20181130/2fd675df/attachment.html>

Thank you T.J. Crowder for giving me your opinion on this proposal.
I didn't know about the Bob Myers' for pick notation and it isn't bad.

I still prefer something like that:
```js
constructor(this.{par1, par2, par3}) {
}
```

but this doesn't sound bad to me:

```js
constructor(par1, par2, par3) {
    this.{} = {par1, par2, par3};
}
```

There is still a repetition, but it is a a step forward.