Open xialvjun opened 3 years ago
I think *() => {}
is better, just like async () => {}
. But I worry people may write 1 * () => {}
Oh, I see. If they really wanted 1 * () => {}
they could achieve such using 1 * (() => {})
in a similar way to destructuring works when the variables have already been declared (but the form you mention is the one I instinctively go for):
let value, value2;
({ value
, value2 } = someObject)
But as to the actual issue - how to gain more attention, I'm not sure, but perhaps negotiating some approach to bring forward might help?
As for drawing more attention to this proposal, that doesn't seem like a good idea while we're still debating syntax. I don't think this proposal is realistically going anywhere until there's a solid decision on the syntax to move forward with. Only then would it make sense to draw wider attention to it.
Please fix
I would support either the one which results in an ASI hazard (though I am unaware of what this means), or my personal favourite - which fits in with my coding style (which if anyone wishes to adopt I dub 'negative indentation' - great for small screens needing lots of thin tabs and short line widths, good for vertical scrolling and minimal eye saccades):
OR (and this might work?):