@littlecalculist @natefaubion @havvy @sebmarkbage @jorendorff @stv_kn @awbjs that bugged some -- flip side of TCP + full functions & blocks.
@awbjs @littlecalculist @BrendanEich We can chat over beer :) I would expect break/continue to unwind back to lexical loop.
-
-
@wycats@littlecalculist@BrendanEich ... so they also need to be able to extend break/continue semantics -
@awbjs@littlecalculist@BrendanEich Again, certainly better than arrows. -
@wycats@littlecalculist@BrendanEich It's slowly coming back to me. Labels were another issue. If you're going to do it, do it right. -
@awbjs@littlecalculist@BrendanEich It seems like you said "if you're gonna do it, do it right" and others said "nah, seems weird and hard" -
@wycats No, see Luke Hoban's point. JS is statement-full. Adding block lambdas late makes wrong return bug habitat.@awbjs@littlecalculist -
@BrendanEich@awbjs@littlecalculist This argument is ~ "blub". -
@wycats ISTM you're doing the "blub" thing as a recovering Rubyist. Look at if-else-value nest vs. if-return case.@awbjs@littlecalculist -
@BrendanEich@awbjs@littlecalculist ISTM that committee did not consider `continue` or something like it as "return from block" a la Ruby - 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@wycats@littlecalculist@BrendanEich yes, indeed. But this is all about user defined control structures... -
@awbjs@littlecalculist@BrendanEich Yes, the Ruby solution only supports one-level TCP. Not ideal, but certainly WiB acceptable.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.