Since we're discussing arrow functions and syntax...
# kai zhu (7 years ago)
-1 this is user-hostile to c++ programmers writing wasm / node-native modules, when they context-switch c++ <-> javascript
# Andrea Giammarchi (7 years ago)
I was for it before ES6 and they told me it was "an arrow too far"
however, object methods shortcuts are better than arrows and methods is the
only place where you need this
# dante federici (7 years ago)
I'd check out the bind and pipe operators: tc39/proposal-bind-operator, tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator
But my problems are => and -> would really lead to some sadness.
I like arrow functions, and sometimes the only reason I don't use them is because I need this-binding.
So I, personally would like a variant that uses the CoffeeScript -> syntax
that is precisely like => except that it uses traditional this-binding. The
only 2 issues I can see are:
Object.assign(obj, this.bar)
work, if then used, say, as follows:const baz = { bar: { /whatever/ } }; foo.call(baz, { /* something */ })`I like arrow functions, and sometimes the only reason I don't use them is because I need this-binding. So I, personally would like a variant that uses the CoffeeScript -> syntax that is precisely like => except that it uses traditional this-binding. The only 2 issues I can see are: * adding more syntax to the language * could the concise form bind this? Would, say `const foo = obj -> Object.assign(obj, this.bar)` work, if then used, say, as follows: `const baz = { bar: { /*whatever*/ } }; foo.call(baz, { /* something */ })` -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20171024/5d68d7ae/attachment.html>