U+1F44D
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 2:57 AM Sanford Whiteman <
swhitemanlistens-softw...@figureone.com> wrote:
> E-40 uses the preferred pronouns he/him/his. There's no need to muddy
> the (40) Waters here.
>
> —— Sandy
>
>
> ___
> es-discuss mailing list
E-40 uses the preferred pronouns he/him/his. There's no need to muddy
the (40) Waters here.
—— Sandy
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
> then we are epistemological nihilists with no criteria whatsoever on which
> to base our language design decisions and this mailing list would have no
> raison d'etre, since we would never be able to align on anything.
That can be the case. Agreement is not required by the parties for a
When we're dealing with code this small, I don't think readability is as
important of an element. Personally I would do `((a) => a.name)`, which is
short and, most importantly, very explicit about what it is doing. If you
know what a function is and you know what a property is, you know what this
The world is awash in subjectivity.
We can nevertheless hope to find broad agreement on at least a transitive
ranking of attributes such as readability; if we don't think we can, then
we are epistemological nihilists with no criteria whatsoever on which to
base our language design decisions and
Using a recursive Proxy to achieve this is a really smart @Barret.
Having said that, a recursive proxy implementation would surely not be possible
without taking a significant performance hit.
Thus, I don’t think Proxies are ideal for anything that is meant to be widely
used throughout the
> If the requirement is merely to write a function to pick properties, yes.
If the requirement is to do that in a more concise, readable, reliable way,
no.
The term "readable" is entirely subjective. As far as am aware there is no
standard for "readable" (in any language, coding or not). Even if
On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 10:59 AM guest271314 wrote:
> Does not destructuring assignment provide a means to achieve the
> requirement?
>
If the requirement is merely to write a function to pick properties, yes.
If the requirement is to do that in a more concise, readable, reliable way,
no.
the referenced video was entertaining to watch (and i learned new things
about typescript and proxies), but i still don't understand your UX-problem
-- at least enough to know what/how a new standard-api would help.
there's a bunch of canvas-scrolling examples @
Does not destructuring assignment provide a means to achieve the
requirement?
```const getEmail = ({contacts:{email:_}}) => _;```
```const getEmailsList = users.map(getEmail);```
```const {contacts:{email:getEmail}} = user;```
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 11:49 AM Simon Farrugia
wrote:
>
I wonder if this could be accomplished with a proxy object instead of new
syntax.
```js
const o = new Proxy(/* some implementation */);
const pickName = o.name;
pickName({ name: "Bob" }); // "Bob"
// maybe this could work too with a recursive proxy
// with handlers for access and invocation
11 matches
Mail list logo
