HE Shi-Jun comments

Results 543 comments of


                                            HE Shi-Jun

Use a wrapper to indicate something follow `::` is a expression but not an identifier

> we already put identifiers after ., now to put expressions after :: is confusing @Fenzland Yeah, I really agree with you in this point! This is also the key...

Use a wrapper to indicate something follow `::` is a expression but not an identifier

> * but `bar.bind(foo)` to `bar::foo` it's really unconsidered I also agree with you in this point! > I agree with that the usage of method extraction is limited too....

Use a wrapper to indicate something follow `::` is a expression but not an identifier

> On the other hand, I don't think the virtual method is so important use case, it can be totally substituted by pipeline operator. Yes pipeline op seems very near...

Use a wrapper to indicate something follow `::` is a expression but not an identifier

> That will be limited to use, how about use a wrapper to apply a expression? Like parameter of arrow functions, no wrapper for identifiers, with wrapper for complex structures....

Use a wrapper to indicate something follow `::` is a expression but not an identifier

> Why not try to make a future that methods with this, last parameter functions and first parameter functions can play together. Yeah, I think it should be one of...

Treating the `#` as part of a `.#` operator instead of as part of a field name `#foo`.

> it's just going to stagnate it more. Then maybe we should let it die. ;-P

Use [[Set]] by default, add `define` keyword. (was: TypeScript class fields have [[Set]] semantics.)

> I’d rather we had decided on Set, but this is the consensus we arrived at. @ljharb There is no real consensus in community, several authors of big frameworks/libraries never...

Use [[Set]] by default, add `define` keyword. (was: TypeScript class fields have [[Set]] semantics.)

> I would be very surprised if even a percent of users ever cared about the difference. @ljharb This is the point. Most users don't want to care about it,...

Use [[Set]] by default, add `define` keyword. (was: TypeScript class fields have [[Set]] semantics.)

> One justification, as I understand it, was that many committee members felt it important that all the code in the class body be declarative @ljharb I don't want to...

Use [[Set]] by default, add `define` keyword. (was: TypeScript class fields have [[Set]] semantics.)

@ljharb > because the feature is important enough that letting it never happen wasn’t acceptable. We have some disagreement here. 1. My opinion is such footgun is bad enough to...