On Feb 27, 2008, at 6:35 PM, Steven Mascaro wrote:
>> This is not to knock named parameters, just to explain why they
>> never
>> made it into a serious proposal in the modern ES4 era.
>
> That sounds fine. The only thing it misses is interchanging positional
> and named parameters, but that's no big deal. Will default values work
> by doing the following?
>
> function foo({option1, crud2, frob} = {option1: 1, crud2: "dirty",
> frob: "enius"}) { ... }
That should work.
> A bit cumbersome, but otherwise OK. I tried in the RI, but it throws a
> ParseError. Though both the following give the same error as well:
>
> function foo({option1, curd2, frob}) {}
> ({x, y} = {x: 42, y: 37})
That object destructuring shorthand was approved at
http://bugs.ecmascript.org/ticket/111
but I don't see a ticket, or morph of 111, asking for RI
implementation. It's not yet implemented:
>> function f({p:x,q:y}) [x,y];
>> f({p:1,q:2})
1,2
>> function g({p,q}) [p,q]
**ERROR** ParseError: unknown token in destructuringField (near <no
filename>:1:1-1.8)
but as shown above, the longhand form works, and so do default
parameters:
>> function h({p:x,q:y} = {p:3,q:4}) [x,y]
>> h()
3,4
/be
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
Es4-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
