This is relevant, too: http://esdiscuss.org/topic/function-declarations-with-lexical-this
I’d still argue that generator arrow functions make more sense than generator function declarations. Axel On 13 Nov 2013, at 10:13 , Allen Wirfs-Brock <al...@wirfs-brock.com> wrote: > Everybody should probably review > esdiscuss.org/topic/why-do-generator-expressions-return-generators where we > discussed this before. > > It wasn't that there was necessarily anything bad about them, but there also > didn't seem to be a strong enough case made in that thread to justify the > work necessary to add them at this late data. > > As you mention, there are issues with arrow functions not being constructors, > although it probably could be dealt with similarly to how generator > comprehensions are handled (generator comprehensions are essentially treated > in the spec. as a special form of generator function). > > I also need to think a bit about whether there might be any this binding > issues. -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de home: rauschma.de twitter: twitter.com/rauschma blog: 2ality.com
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
