If only we could use any Unicode character, then | might look like:
◀
but this is more symbolic of what is actually going on:
⥆
of course if we are talking about classes with parallel inheritance hierarchies
it might be better to use:
⇇
And who could resisting trying to make one
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
should it be be 2 or undefined
undefined might be reasonable because it is an array pattern, and the source
object is only has two array-like elements
2 might be reasonable because the source
In a similar vain, what is the value of r in:
let [z,y,...r] = {0:0, 1:1, 2:2, length: 3, 3:3,4:4};
should it be [2] or [2,3,4] (and if the latter how is that determined)?
It seems to me that [2] is the right answer, and if that is the cause,
consistency requires that for the first problem z
On 05.11.2011 20:28, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
should it be be 2 or undefined
undefined might be reasonable because it is an array pattern, and the source object is
only has two array-like
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:28 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
should it be be 2 or undefined
undefined might be reasonable because it is an array pattern, and the source
object is only has
On 05.11.2011 20:38, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
In a similar vain, what is the value of r in:
let [z,y,...r] = {0:0, 1:1, 2:2, length: 3, 3:3,4:4};
should it be [2] or [2,3,4] (and if the latter how is that determined)?
It seems to me that [2] is the right answer,
How so? If `...n` is the
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:45 AM, Dmitry Soshnikov wrote:
On 05.11.2011 20:38, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
In a similar vain, what is the value of r in:
let [z,y,...r] = {0:0, 1:1, 2:2, length: 3, 3:3,4:4};
should it be [2] or [2,3,4] (and if the latter how is that determined)?
It seems to me
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:44 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:28 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
should it be be 2 or undefined
undefined might be reasonable because it is an
To me the lhs indicates: array. Thus, the rhs is a pseudo-array. When used as
such we get:
[].join.call({0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2}, -)
'0-1'
Thus, 2 is invisible. That’s what I would expect, too, intuitively. I’d think
that the assignment should reflect that (thus: z = undefined)
On
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
should it be be 2 or undefined
undefined might be reasonable because it is an array pattern, and the source
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
(I assume the pattern should be [x,y,z], not [z,y,z], or am I missing a point?)
should it be be 2 or undefined
On 05.11.2011 20:49, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:38 AM, Dmitry Soshnikov wrote:
On 05.11.2011 20:28, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
should it be be 2 or undefined
undefined
On 05.11.2011 21:04, Dmitry Soshnikov wrote:
On 05.11.2011 20:54, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:45 AM, Dmitry Soshnikov wrote:
On 05.11.2011 20:38, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
In a similar vain, what is the value of r in:
let [z,y,...r] = {0:0, 1:1, 2:2, length: 3, 3:3,4:4};
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Lasse Reichstein wrote:
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com
wrote:
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
(I assume the pattern should be [x,y,z], not
On Nov 5, 2011, at 10:04 AM, Dmitry Soshnikov wrote:
On 05.11.2011 20:54, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:45 AM, Dmitry Soshnikov wrote:
On 05.11.2011 20:38, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
In a similar vain, what is the value of r in:
let [z,y,...r] = {0:0, 1:1, 2:2, length: 3,
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:59 AM, John J Barton wrote:
(Oh great more features that turn programming into little brain teasers :-( )
Devs need an algorithm:
let _lhs = [];
let _rhs = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
_lhs[0] = _rhs[0];
_lhs[1] = _rhs[1];
_lhs[2] = _rhs[2];
let z = _lhs[0];
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
and there I was, thinking I understood more than half of JS..
Since this was new to me, I referred to the spec. Here
strikeis my reading/strike are my readings:
The rhs is an Object, but
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 18:10, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
What if the RHS doesn't have a length property at all? Or it has one
with a value that isn't convertible to a number? No need for that
complexity.
This case is consistently handled throughtout the ES spec:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Claus Reinke wrote:
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
and there I was, thinking I understood more than half of JS..
Since this was new to me, I referred to the spec. Here strikeis my
On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Till Schneidereit wrote:
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 18:10, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
What if the RHS doesn't have a length property at all? Or it has one
with a value that isn't convertible to a number? No need for that
complexity.
This case
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:59 AM, John J Barton wrote:
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com
wrote:
In the following declaration, what should be the value of z?
let [z,y,z] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
should it be be 2 or undefined
undefined might be
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 19:27, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
ToInteger( obj.[[Get]](length))
evaluates to 0 if length is missing or has a bogus value.
So in your favored solution, would the following example result in x,
y, and z all being undefined?
let [x,y,z] = {0:0,
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 11:55, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
The issue with ... in an array destructuring pattern is different from the
case without. We have a choice, as you say. It's not obvious that doing a
get of 'length' on the RHS (once per ...) is the right answer. It's
On Nov 5, 2011, at 10:24 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:59 AM, John J Barton wrote:
(Oh great more features that turn programming into little brain teasers :-( )
Devs need an algorithm:
let _lhs = [];
let _rhs = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
_lhs[0] = _rhs[0];
On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:01 AM, John J Barton wrote:
I can see why my version is wrong
Your interpretion is not wrong.
But the feature does not do this. Rather, since LHS is array, it
coerces the RHS to an array:
let z = coerceToArray(_rhs)[0];
and we don't know what that operation means.
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 14:41, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
1. Should an array pattern always query 'length'?
2. If the answer to (1) is no, then should ... in an array pattern query
'length'?
On reflection and at this point in the thread, with your reply in mind, my
prefs in
On Nov 5, 2011, at 12:38 PM, Erik Arvidsson wrote:
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 11:55, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
The issue with ... in an array destructuring pattern is different from the
case without. We have a choice, as you say. It's not obvious that doing a
get of 'length' on
On Nov 5, 2011, at 2:28 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 10:24 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 9:59 AM, John J Barton wrote:
...
I don't understand what the source object is only has two
array-like elements can mean.
If you used any of the array
On Nov 5, 2011, at 2:34 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
It should, as no length is assumed to mean length === 0, IIUC, and
that seems so unintuitive to me that it sways my opinion towards not
imposing array-ness on the RHS.
but that is
On Nov 5, 2011, at 3:50 PM, Erik Arvidsson wrote:
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 14:41, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
1. Should an array pattern always query 'length'?
2. If the answer to (1) is no, then should ... in an array pattern query
'length'?
On reflection and at this point in
On Nov 5, 2011, at 5:40 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
In general, destructuring already has too many moving parts to simply be a
simple desugaring. array/object distinctions, rests on the LHS, default
value specifiers, etc. I'm specifying it like any other feature in the
language.
Take
On Nov 5, 2011, at 5:52 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 2:34 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
It should, as no length is assumed to mean length === 0, IIUC, and
that seems so unintuitive to me that it sways my opinion towards
32 matches
Mail list logo
