2008/8/24 Brendan Eich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I call it unnecessary to make let (x = a, y = b) {...} be shorthand > for (function (x, y) {...})(a,b). Count characters: 24 vs. 28. Come > on!
And in the case of the let expressions using the shorthand (it is proposed for ES4 and available in FireFox 3.0) that allows to replace function optionalName(...) { return expr; } by function optionalName(...) expr the situation is let (x = a, y = b) expr versus (function(x, y) expr)(a, b) That is again just 4 extra characters, 23 versus 27 and there is nothing to sweeten with sugar. Now, if those proposal of having "fun" or even "ƛ" as a shorthand for the "function" keyword would be resurrected, then the explicit lambda forms would be shorter then the let forms. Plus, compared with the let blocks or expressions, such shorthands could be used with each and every function definition. Regards, Igor _______________________________________________ Es-discuss mailing list Es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss