On Feb 4, 2012, at 6:02 AM, Jason Orendorff wrote: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <al...@wirfs-brock.com> > wrote: >> On Feb 3, 2012, at 4:26 PM, Jason Orendorff wrote: >>> On 2/3/12 6:13 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: >>>> But I also have to validly (and hopefully reasonably) specify exactly what >>>> happens for the unrealistic use cases. There is a problem with your >>>> desugaring in that the evaluation of INIT isn't scoped correctly relative >>>> to V. >>> Hmmm. I don't see the problem yet. I think it's scoped the way I intended >>> it: INIT is evaluated in the enclosing environment; V isn't in scope. >> >> Under the scoping rules TC39 has agreed to, the initializer of a let/const >> is always shadowed by the binding it is initializing[...] > > That rule doesn't make sense in this context. There should be either > one V for the whole loop, or one V per iteration. Having both seems > perverse.
I agree, but having both is exactly what for(let;;) requires in order to satisfy (actually approach satisfying) everybody. If you want the simplicity of the either or alternative then a good approach seems to be that for-in/for-of is one per iteration and for(;;) is one for the whole loop. C# recently when though a similar design change and that is exactly where they ended up. Allen _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
