@wycats Not abstract. @awbjs @littlecalculist
-
-
@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 -
@wycats Again,@awbjs & I supported. As@littlecalculist noted, return-throws hurt. Luke cited 'return' hazard. Several hits to battleship. -
@BrendanEich@wycats@littlecalculist It's sad that block lambda a poor fit to JS. But very happy with arrows. We made the right choice. -
@awbjs@BrendanEich@littlecalculist this sentiment is what I am arguing against. Can live with decision but not this retcon. -
@wycats@BrendanEich@littlecalculist simply my opinion after working hard to make block lambdas fit then doing arrow semantics -
@awbjs@BrendanEich@littlecalculist easily believe arrows easier to spec. Fewer lexical things to handle. Not nec simpler programming model - 4 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.