@stefanpenner @domenic it doesn't feel new, it feels old pointlessly dressed as new (see my getter comparison)
-
-
Replying to @jaffathecake
@jaffathecake@stefanpenner Yes. fn("css"), fn(`css`), fn('css') should all work. Saying "you must use fn`css`" is ridiculous.1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @domenic
@jaffathecake@stefanpenner A tagged template string f`x` whose output is some function applied to `x` is a sign of abusing tags.1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @domenic
@jaffathecake@stefanpenner The point of template string *TAGS* is to process the arguments piece-wise. If not doing that, just use a fn.1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @domenic
@domenic@jaffathecake our hope is that tagged template strings. Will be a good way to also hint to editors for syntax/autocomplete etc2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @stefanpenner
@stefanpenner@jaffathecake Why? They're just function calls. Editors should accept html('...') just as much as html(`...`).3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @domenic
@domenic@stefanpenner@jaffathecake just want to make sure I understand... you're telling me we should do hbs(`...`) vs. hbs`...`?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats@stefanpenner@jaffathecake not sure about hbs but the tag that started this thread just concated its arguments. Would the hbs tag?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @domenic
@domenic@stefanpenner@jaffathecake it compiles the template, ahead of time if possible.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
@wycats@stefanpenner@jaffathecake can you just compile normal strings, without component-wise processing? Then use a string-taking func.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@domenic @stefanpenner @jaffathecake normal strings aren't multiline so we need template literals no matter what.
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.