Just noticed Allen filed this: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/97
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Herby Vojčík <[email protected]> wrote: > IMO this is ok, if the pattern is empty, nothing is extracted and > assigned. I see it similar to using = in expressions: it is probably an > error, jshint/IDEs should issue a warning, but I would not make an _error_ > out of it (think for example cross-compilers who can produce dynamic > destucturing assignments and they would need to parse it for "emptiness"); > not consistent if special cases are errors. > > Herby > > Standards Zakas wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> In playing with destructuring, it seems like there are some syntax >> gotchas that really should trigger some sort of error and instead fail >> silently. For instance: >> >> ``` >> let {} = foo; >> ``` >> >> This line does absolutely nothing and is most likely an error on the >> developer's part. However, this is completely valid syntax and not a >> parsing error. Fortunately, it's pretty clear from looking at it that >> there's a problem. Another example isn't so clear: >> >> ``` >> let { bar: {} } = foo; >> ``` >> >> This one, I'd argue, is even worse. It looks like it should do >> something, but silently does nothing. >> >> Is there any possibility to add an early error for empty destructuring >> patterns (array and object)? It seems like this would save developers a >> lot of trouble in the long run. >> >> >> -- >> ________________________________________ >> Nicholas C. Zakas >> http://www.nczonline.net >> @slicknet >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> > -- ________________________________________ Nicholas C. Zakas http://www.nczonline.net @slicknet
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
