Re: Re: [RFC] Arrow functions / short closures

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, at 6:48 AM, Benjamin Morel wrote: > Even though I was originally hoping for something closer to JS syntax, > considering Nikita's summary it looks like the best contender is still > fn(), as originally proposed. > At least it looks like a function indeed, to the uninitiated. > > So FWIW, I think that a vote for the fn() syntax only still makes sense. > The risk with the 2 or 3 options is never being able to reach a concensus: > is a relative majority or an absolute majority for one of the syntaxes > acceptable, or are you required by the RFC process to get a 2/3 majority > for this vote as well? If so, considering the discussion so far, I think > this will be hard to achieve with 2 choices, let alone with 3. > > - Ben I don't think the wiki currently supports it, but that's exactly what ranked choice voting is for. :-) --Larry Garfield