Andreas Svensson
Andreas Svensson
@gajus It ends up in the source code and also affects `white-space: pre`. I would also expect many to prefer ``` ` Foo Bar ` ``` ...over... ``` `Foo Bar`...
> Is it true that if we implement this, is it true that the parser would accept any HTML content (i.e. legacy content) as correct? The opposite is not true...
I could put together a working PR quite easily if that would be of interest, to get a feel for how it would work in practice if it's at all...
Isn't it wrong to repurpose namespaces for objects? Why not use `inner.href` which would reflect the syntax used for objects in JS. > key and ref are now no longer...
@sebmarkbage Can you clarify what you mean by ASI?
@sebmarkbage Ah ofc. What I posted in that issue: ```jsx foo() // implying implicit return ``` Would get tokenized to `"foo" "()" ""` and thus normally parsed as `foo() <...
@bmeck Remove the semicolon, this is about implicit semicolon: http://astexplorer.net/#/gist/8fcdde72ae0863f9a0947fb81774338e/56027b28ba324ac2a492fd62e3302aeff8834a3f
> I think there is a reasonable motivation for doing implicit return contrary to other JS contexts requiring explicit return. An arrow function without curly braces with a do expression...
@sebmarkbage Ah ok, now I'm with you. :+1:
> What I'm referring to is JS without JSX has that as valid syntax. Even if it's technically not ambiguous it would require a lot of look ahead to see...