Jon Zeppieri wrote: > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Michael Haufe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> So let me see if I understand this argument correctly. >> > > I generally agree with what you've written here -- just a couple of > comments... > > >> If I want the benefits of this blocking, does that mean I have to give >> up some of my shorthand? >> >> (a === b) ? true : false; >> >> How would the block work in this case? >> > > Not sure what you're getting at here. What block are you referring to? > > >> The JavaScript 1.7 let statement is already the better block we need, >> and instead of being a generic solution like the one you've suggested, >> it has flexibility and doesn't force me to change the way I already code >> things: >> > > I'm partial to the let statement, too, but you should know that it's > not being proposed for either ES3.1 or ES4. But yes, it makes the > scope of the let-bound variables perfectly clear -- let vs. let* > binding semantics aside. (Does the JS1.7 let statement bind > sequentially or in parallel?) > > -Jon > > >
I was basically asking if these two structures were supposed to be equivalent and part of what he was suggesting: if(a === b){ foo; } else{{ bar; }} _________________________________ (a === b) ? foo : {{ bar }}; _______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list Es4-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss