Re: RFC proposal : "new" keyword shorthand

On Jun 7 2024, at 8:49 pm, Erick de Azevedo Lima <ericklima.comp@gmail.com> wrote: > The new keyword is meaningful and everyone knows what's being done just by looking at it. > Removing it would make the language less readable. But it's a BC so big that I don't think > it can be done anyway. > > FWIW Languages like Dart are very readable without the extra new keyword (it supports instance creation with new or without it). I haven't put any thought into the engine changes that would be necessary to implement a similar syntax where new becomes optional, but I wouldn't be opposed to such a change if there was a PR out there for it. But I'm with you -- I think new is fine. I 100% don't want to see it replaced with some sort of confusing shorthand, but I might be able to be convinced to make the keyword optional. I also think in terms of value, cycles would be better spent on other things than to new or not to new . J