On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Erik Arvidsson <[email protected]>wrote:
> Under the open issues for Quasi Literals, > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:quasis#nesting , the > topic of nesting is brought up. > > After implementing Quasi Literals in Traceur it is clear that > supporting nested quasi literals is easier than not supporting them. > +1000. Quasis as originally proposed had no such restriction. The Unicorns example at <http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:quasis#nesting> is I think fairly representative of what will become a common kind of use case -- unless we cripple quasis. I would be interested in seeing what this code looks like when refactored to live within this restriction. In E we have quasis that are somewhat similar and somewhat different. But we make much use of the ability to place arbitrary expressions within the dollar-hole, including nested quasis. I think our quasis as well should allow any expression. The issue is not just nested quasis. > What is the argument for not supporting nesting? Can we resolve this? > > -- > erik > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
