Re: RE: Allen's lambda syntax proposal

2008-12-01 Thread Peter Michaux
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>-Original Message- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:es-discuss- >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Douglas Crockford > ... >>because you can think of the \ as being an abbreviation of function. >> >> \ name(a,

RE: RE: Allen's lambda syntax proposal

2008-12-01 Thread Allen Wirfs-Brock
>-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:es-discuss- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Douglas Crockford ... >because you can think of the \ as being an abbreviation of function. > > \ name(a,b,c) {} > >Just don't start your function name with u. > Exactly, that's why I didn'

Re: RE: Allen's lambda syntax proposal

2008-12-01 Thread Breton Slivka
> Is recursion still desirable in this form. If so, then of the three I like > >\(a,b,c) {} > > because you can think of the \ as being an abbreviation of function. > >\ name(a,b,c) {} > > Just don't start your function name with u. > well if we're thinking about lambdas as blocks++, then

Re: RE: Allen's lambda syntax proposal

2008-12-01 Thread Douglas Crockford
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: {|a,b,c| ...} or \(a,b,c) {...} or {\(a,b,c) ...} The use of \ slightly bothers me because it is takes a character > that now is exclusively used in the lexical (token) grammar >( Unicode escapes, string escapes, line continuations) > and gives it syntactic significan