@awbjs @littlecalculist @BrendanEich Again, certainly better than arrows.
-
-
Replying to @wycats
@wycats@littlecalculist@BrendanEich It's slowly coming back to me. Labels were another issue. If you're going to do it, do it right.2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @awbjs
@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"3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats No, see Luke Hoban's point. JS is statement-full. Adding block lambdas late makes wrong return bug habitat.@awbjs@littlecalculist2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BrendanEich
@BrendanEich@awbjs@littlecalculist This argument is ~ "blub".2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats ISTM you're doing the "blub" thing as a recovering Rubyist. Look at if-else-value nest vs. if-return case.@awbjs@littlecalculist6 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrendanEich
@BrendanEich@awbjs@littlecalculist ISTM that committee did not consider `continue` or something like it as "return from block" a la Ruby2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats Of course we did; we're not idiots, we looked at Ruby. JS has no next v. continue. You're "blubbing" here.@awbjs@littlecalculist2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BrendanEich
@BrendanEich@awbjs@littlecalculist "we're not idiots; we looked at ruby" does not comport with my experience on TC392 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats Your polemical style that is not justified. Ruby `next` v. JS `continue` discussion: http://esdiscuss.org/topic/block-lambdas-break-and-continue ….@awbjs@littlecalculist4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@BrendanEich @awbjs @littlecalculist your position is that TC39 spends a lot of time not loling at Ruby when it comes up? Not my experience
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.