>> - Pro block-lambdas: A new construct that can be used in places where >> dynamic |this| (that normal functions are always going to have) would be a >> burden. > > And for other purposes, such as block-like "bodies" of Array forEach, etc. > methods.
Right, you want lexical |this| in these cases and the dynamic |this| (of regular functions) gets in the way. I consider that a benefit of block-lambdas (in addition to them having a compact syntax and their support for break etc.). >> - Pro arrows: little semantic change. > > No semantic change, I claim. What differs apart from syntax? Correct. I meant “less semantic change” (that with block lambdas), but “no semantic change” puts it better. >> With the shorthand for methods in object literals, there is the question >> whether dynamic |this| is ever needed. > > This does not make sense. > > Object literals used for prototypes have methods but those methods must use > dynamic |this| because the calls use individual instances as their reference > bases, not the prototype. I meant: One can already write methods (functions with dynamic |this|) in a very concise manner, thanks for Allen’s object literal extensions. Then you have to ask: Do we really need the dynamic this arrow ->, or can we make do with just the lexical this arrow =>. >> - Pro ƒ: short, syntactically very similar to current semantics *and* syntax. > > The florin works no better than Greek lower-case lambda. Both are already > legal ES3-5.1 Identifiers and cannot be retasked as keywords, especially not > with the name of the function in a function expression optional. Ah, damn, I knew it was a very convincing argument. ;-) There is still the faint hope that this isn’t actually used in practice, but still. -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de twitter.com/rauschma home: rauschma.de blog: 2ality.com
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
