> > My point is serious, in that we are not bound to follow C, C++, or Java > and try to separate formal parameter scope, default parameter > initialization, or other observables from those languages, just because of > that left curly brace at the start of a function body.
Yeah - but the argument against doesn't lean on those other languages. It leans on the fact that curly braces signal scope boundaries (in a symbolic-human-conceptual way), except when they don't. Minimizing the number of exceptions to that rule minimizes confusion. On the other hand, thinking of default expressions as "belonging" to the function body ends up being cleaner overall and wins, I think, for me. But any documentation we create on this language feature will need to be painfully explicit about the scope rules. Kevin
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
