@wycats @littlecalculist @BrendanEich It's slowly coming back to me. Labels were another issue. If you're going to do it, do it right.
@BrendanEich @awbjs @littlecalculist I buy that argument, not these other points.
-
-
@wycats What "that argument" and "these other points"? I've only made one point throughout.@awbjs@littlecalculist -
@BrendanEich@awbjs@littlecalculist "it's an obvious hazard" is a claim not an argument. Claim not backed by evidence. -
@wycats FWIW I prefer the switch too here but I don't like decisions "because of n00bs" they can learn@BrendanEich@awbjs@littlecalculist -
@WebReflection "They can learn" too low a bar. Kitchen-sink languages incur outsized learning & impl. cost.@wycats@awbjs@littlecalculist -
@BrendanEich@WebReflection@awbjs@littlecalculist arrows are a very complex feature. Not just "shorter functions". -
@wycats So are block lambdas. This is why I wrote that it's either one or the other in the proposals.@WebReflection@awbjs@littlecalculist -
@BrendanEich@awbjs@littlecalculist my point: people FUDed about blocks, held up arrows as simpler. Arrows have more complex rules. -
@wycats Arrows not *that* complex. Both have bespoke complexity, but block-lambda 'return' TCP alien to C-ish langs.@awbjs@littlecalculist - 9 more replies
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.