Andreas Svensson
Andreas Svensson
@jeffmo I still think it's relevant though. But my point was that why even require `{/* */}`, why not make JSX behave like JS which is the host language. I.e....
@jeffmo But that's partially what syntax highlighting is there for right? :)
What I find mostly annoying about the current state of comments is that, this makes sense and works: ``` return ( // ); return ( ); ``` But this doesn't:...
@mvolkmann IMHO, JSX is not XML, it's JS. It's just new syntax to do something we've always been able to do. ``` html ``` Is also problematic, because that would...
> Given that JSX is a "new syntax to do something we've always been able to do", wouldn't this argument (JSX has two ways...) be an argument against JSX entirely?...
> That its not where the XML comment would be allowed to work. > It would only be valid inside jsx markup. @pke But then you have to use different...
I did a lot of experiments on this a year or so ago. It's not terribly complex but the API becomes rather cumbersome or inflexible with if done naively: A....
> I was proposing that all the JSX expressions BE statement syntax. So the presence of a JSX expression is equivalent to `renderOutput += ''`. This is more inline with...
> I agree that JS's ternary isn't as ideal as but for the simple case you could just use JS's short circuiting logical operators, right? That seems even worse to...
> @syranide Would you be happy with: > > ``` > > > > ``` > > It's a little more verbose, but the upside is that you would also...