Jorge wrote:
If short function syntax and block lambdas are mutually exclusive, then the
block lambdas' syntax should be considered as an alternative for short function
syntax, that is, {| params | /* body */ } is a perfectly valid candidate for
short functions, without TCP.
No, based on Ruby and Smalltalk precedent this syntax implies TCP. If
you don't like TCP, use function-based shorter syntax. The choice is
clear enough, and "crossing the streams" is simply going to make for
more confusion, all else equal.
And given that `this` is an invalid name for a parameter, to indicate a bound
this we could simply include it in the parameters list:
{|this, arg1, arg2| /* body */} bound `this`
{|arg1, arg2| /* body */} unbound `this`
The "Harmony of My Dreams" era had this optional leading |this| formal
for #-functions but we did not agree on this-parameterization. What is
the parameter's default value? Can .apply/.call override?
Again block-lambdas are TCP-only by their heritage. No unbound-this, no
arguments, break/control/return affect enclosing function control flow.
Mixing up block-like syntax and function-like semantics is strictly
worse than any alternatives that hew one way or the other.
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
