In general ECMAScript lacks lots of features. You may well ask why it doesn't 
have any other pet feature, and you can often point to compile-to-JS languages 
that add those. This doesn't imply that the feature should be added to the 
language.

Here, let me try:

---

I'm aware of LispyScript, as well as all of these: 
https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/wiki/List-of-languages-that-compile-to-JS.

But those languages appear to have been created precisely because ECMAScript 
lacks features like lots of parentheses or macros. How many of those languages 
offer lots of parentheses? I count quite a few... Doesn't that say something?

---

The existence of a feature in other languages does not imply it should be added 
to ECMAScript. You'll have to justify better than that why you think strong 
typing would be valuable to a language that has historically rejected it. (I'll 
wait for one of the old timers to chime in about the ES4 days here.)

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Reply via email to