On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:02 AM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:22 AM, Andrew Fedoniouk > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Quite often I see constructions like this: > >> > >> foo({one:1,two:2}); > >> > >> so call of function with single parameter - object literal. > >> Idiom named "Poor man named arguments passing" > >> > >> Idea is to extend existing JS/ES syntax calls to support > >> simple form of the call above: > >> > >> foo {one:1,two:2 }; > >> > >> Semi-formally that syntax looks like: > >> > >> function-call: > >> <name-token> '(' <parameter-list> ')' // existing form > >> <name-token> <object-literal> // proposal > > > > > > Existing grammar: > > > > > > CallExpression Arguments > > > > Arguments : > > ( ) > > ( ArgumentList ) > > > > > > To add ObjectLiteral, at very least the grammar would need to have a > > NoLineTerminator between CallExpression and Arguments, which breaks > extant > > code. > > Yes, NoLineTerminator is required for non-strict mode (that ugly > semicolon elision > strikes again) > > Even in non-strict mode this code: > > function foo(obj) { return 1; } > > var c = foo { one:1 }; > > produces parsing error before the '{' - "semicolon required". > Of course it does, but again, you're ignoring my point about ASI. Invocation parens (and arguments list) are allowed to be on the a following line: function foo(value) { return value; } foo ("hi!") // "hi!"; And again, the opening and closing curly brace synatx that you think is an ObjectLiteral becomes a valid Block on the next line (because invocation parens and argument lists CAN be on the next line): function foo(obj) { return 1; } var c = foo { one:1 }; <-- valid block, containing a LabelStatement // 1 c; // function foo(obj) { return 1; } > > The same kind of error is in this case too: > > function foo(p1,p2) { return 1; } > > var c = foo 1,2; > Still the same reason I've said over several responses. function foo(p1,p2) { return 1; } var c = foo 1,2; // 2 c; // function foo(obj) { return 1; } > So that syntax change will be backward compatible - it will > not change semantic of existing valid code. > Contrary to the evidence I've provided several times in several messages? Rick
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
