From: David Herman <dherman at mozilla.com>
Subject: Re: Grawlix
Date: October 7, 2011 15:54:58 GMT+02:00
To: John J Barton <johnjbarton at johnjbarton.com>
Cc: Douglas Crockford <douglas at crockford.com>, es-discuss at mozilla.org
On this particular issue, I'm inclined to agree -- I think we should be extremely sparing with how many new sigils, if any, we introduce into the language. You'll notice Brendan has repeatedly said similar things about <| and .{ for example. Syntax matters.
I like the idea of infix alphanumeric operators. E.g.:
foo @extends bar
desugars to
extends(foo, bar)
Then a variety of things could be introduced without the need for new sigils, while still looking good. It clearly would work better with multiple dispatch, but I know that that won’t be in the cards for a long time (if ever).
As an aside, I find Allen’s set of operators essential for increasing the usability of object literals.
TC39 does our design work out in the open. That means everyone gets to see and participate in all parts of this process. The most common misunderstanding that arises is that TC39 is on the brink of standardizing on every single idea that has been considered. However, this has never been and will not be (at least as long as I'm part of this process) the case. But you can't short-cut the process. You can't pick the winners until you've let all the ideas run their course.
Note also that Fred Brooks contends that good design is hard and best done by a team of one (two, if one of the two is dominant). This is the Benevolent Dictator’s role and it shows if someone plays it (Google+, Python, Apple products). A Benevolent Dictator also means that someone has to make the hard choices, because it is impossible to please everybody (possibly even to please any single person 100% – except for the Dictator).
Obviously with JavaScript and its large community of stakeholders, there is no way a Benevolent Dictator can be completely dictatorial, but his/her opinion can have a little more weight than other’s, to ensure a certain internal consistency and elegance.
> From: David Herman <dherman at mozilla.com>
> Subject: Re: Grawlix
> Date: October 7, 2011 15:54:58 GMT+02:00
> To: John J Barton <johnjbarton at johnjbarton.com>
> Cc: Douglas Crockford <douglas at crockford.com>, es-discuss at mozilla.org
>
>
> On this particular issue, I'm inclined to agree -- I think we should be extremely sparing with how many new sigils, if any, we introduce into the language. You'll notice Brendan has repeatedly said similar things about <| and .{ for example. Syntax matters.
I like the idea of infix alphanumeric operators. E.g.:
foo @extends bar
desugars to
extends(foo, bar)
Then a variety of things could be introduced without the need for new sigils, while still looking good. It clearly would work better with multiple dispatch, but I know that that won’t be in the cards for a long time (if ever).
As an aside, I find Allen’s set of operators essential for increasing the usability of object literals.
> TC39 does our design work out in the open. That means everyone gets to see and participate in all parts of this process. The most common misunderstanding that arises is that TC39 is on the brink of standardizing on every single idea that has been considered. However, this has never been and will not be (at least as long as I'm part of this process) the case. But you can't short-cut the process. You can't pick the winners until you've let all the ideas run their course.
Note also that Fred Brooks contends that good design is hard and best done by a team of one (two, if one of the two is dominant). This is the Benevolent Dictator’s role and it shows if someone plays it (Google+, Python, Apple products). A Benevolent Dictator also means that someone has to make the hard choices, because it is impossible to please everybody (possibly even to please any single person 100% – except for the Dictator).
Obviously with JavaScript and its large community of stakeholders, there is no way a Benevolent Dictator can be completely dictatorial, but his/her opinion can have a little more weight than other’s, to ensure a certain internal consistency and elegance.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
axel at rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20111007/4fd9791a/attachment-0001.html>
I like the idea of infix alphanumeric operators. E.g.: foo @extends bar desugars to extends(foo, bar)
Then a variety of things could be introduced without the need for new sigils, while still looking good. It clearly would work better with multiple dispatch, but I know that that won’t be in the cards for a long time (if ever).
As an aside, I find Allen’s set of operators essential for increasing the usability of object literals.
Note also that Fred Brooks contends that good design is hard and best done by a team of one (two, if one of the two is dominant). This is the Benevolent Dictator’s role and it shows if someone plays it (Google+, Python, Apple products). A Benevolent Dictator also means that someone has to make the hard choices, because it is impossible to please everybody (possibly even to please any single person 100% – except for the Dictator).
Obviously with JavaScript and its large community of stakeholders, there is no way a Benevolent Dictator can be completely dictatorial, but his/her opinion can have a little more weight than other’s, to ensure a certain internal consistency and elegance.
> From: David Herman <dherman at mozilla.com> > Subject: Re: Grawlix > Date: October 7, 2011 15:54:58 GMT+02:00 > To: John J Barton <johnjbarton at johnjbarton.com> > Cc: Douglas Crockford <douglas at crockford.com>, es-discuss at mozilla.org > > > On this particular issue, I'm inclined to agree -- I think we should be extremely sparing with how many new sigils, if any, we introduce into the language. You'll notice Brendan has repeatedly said similar things about <| and .{ for example. Syntax matters. I like the idea of infix alphanumeric operators. E.g.: foo @extends bar desugars to extends(foo, bar) Then a variety of things could be introduced without the need for new sigils, while still looking good. It clearly would work better with multiple dispatch, but I know that that won’t be in the cards for a long time (if ever). As an aside, I find Allen’s set of operators essential for increasing the usability of object literals. > TC39 does our design work out in the open. That means everyone gets to see and participate in all parts of this process. The most common misunderstanding that arises is that TC39 is on the brink of standardizing on every single idea that has been considered. However, this has never been and will not be (at least as long as I'm part of this process) the case. But you can't short-cut the process. You can't pick the winners until you've let all the ideas run their course. Note also that Fred Brooks contends that good design is hard and best done by a team of one (two, if one of the two is dominant). This is the Benevolent Dictator’s role and it shows if someone plays it (Google+, Python, Apple products). A Benevolent Dictator also means that someone has to make the hard choices, because it is impossible to please everybody (possibly even to please any single person 100% – except for the Dictator). Obviously with JavaScript and its large community of stakeholders, there is no way a Benevolent Dictator can be completely dictatorial, but his/her opinion can have a little more weight than other’s, to ensure a certain internal consistency and elegance. -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer axel at rauschma.de twitter.com/rauschma home: rauschma.de blog: 2ality.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20111007/4fd9791a/attachment-0001.html>