Open dead-claudia opened 1 day ago
I agree that call-this syntax and PFA syntax are probably compatible with one another, as in receiver~>fn~()
.
As you probably know, PFA syntax has faced an uphill battle with the Committee, being seen as too niche for the a “heavy” solution like syntax. This proposal has also faced similar headwinds.
It would be cool if we could find a real-life codebase in which call-this syntax and PFA syntax would both be useful—i.e., “why would we want to be able to write receiver~>fn~()
”.
Ref: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-call-this#pfa-syntax
The most obvious syntax I can think of would be
receiver~>fn~()
. And just in general substituting~>
for any.
property access.