Closed lhorie closed 8 years ago
I think (var a 1) and (var a) read closer to their intent than (= a 1) and (= a)
(var a 1)
(var a)
(= a 1)
(= a)
Also, ES6 has let, so including a let macro into eslisp later would be more orthogonal if the hoisted declaration identifier is var
let
var
And that would free up the = identifier so you could use that for assignment instead of :=, to keep things closer to js syntax
=
:=
I agree—those should be the defaults.
The current names are remnants from when it hadn't quite clicked yet that I wanted eslisp to just clearly map to JS.
In v0.5.0. :sparkles:
I think
(var a 1)
and(var a)
read closer to their intent than(= a 1)
and(= a)
Also, ES6 has
let
, so including alet
macro into eslisp later would be more orthogonal if the hoisted declaration identifier isvar
And that would free up the
=
identifier so you could use that for assignment instead of:=
, to keep things closer to js syntax