> I see it all the time in JavaScript, where ES2015 introduced a new
> syntax {name} equivalent to {"name":name} - people will deliberately
> change their variable names to match the desired object keys. So
> saying "forcing" is an exaggeration, but a very slight one.
Do you have an opinion or f
On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 5:32 PM, Anders Hovmöller wrote:
>
>> I see it all the time in JavaScript, where ES2015 introduced a new
>> syntax {name} equivalent to {"name":name} - people will deliberately
>> change their variable names to match the desired object keys. So
>> saying "forcing" is an exag
On Sun, Sep 09, 2018 at 07:37:21AM +0200, Anders Hovmöller wrote:
>
> > You have carefully avoided explicitly accusing me of making a straw man
> > argument while nevertheless making a completely irrelevant mention of
> > it, associating me with the fallacy.
>
> I read that as him accusing you
Can we all just PLEASE stop the meta-arguments enumerating logical
fallacies and recriminating about who made it personal first?!
Yes, let's discuss specific proposals and alternatives, and so on. If
someone steps out of line of being polite and professional, just ignore it.
On Sun, Sep 9, 2018,
I just realized I have another question for you:
If you had to chose which one would you prefer:
f(*, a b, c)
or:
f(=a, =b, =c)
?
I know you’re clearly against the entire idea but it seems we should prefer the
least disliked alternative in such a scenario.
__
