From d27ea3eb9037fc3bc200907629de978dfc5d732c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Rohan Kumar Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 15:53:29 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] Correction on Yuescript syntax --- content/notes/yuescript-first-impressions.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/content/notes/yuescript-first-impressions.md b/content/notes/yuescript-first-impressions.md index 4ae7539..bd60946 100644 --- a/content/notes/yuescript-first-impressions.md +++ b/content/notes/yuescript-first-impressions.md @@ -9,6 +9,6 @@ I just discovered [Yuescript](https://yuescript.org/doc/), which is like MoonScr I like features like pipelines (much cleaner than repeated assignment or nested parentheses in function calls) and compile-time macros. The sugar for multiple and destructuring assignment is handy. -I find the additional operators unnecessary, and not worth their cognitive overhead. The `?` operator was already used as sugar for a parameter-free function call. The `[]` operator could easily have been a function in a library instead. +I find the additional operators unnecessary, and not worth their cognitive overhead. It re-uses some operators for different purposes, creating confusion. The `[]` operator could easily have been a function in a library instead. One of the trade-offs for this much syntactic sugar is some syntactic ambiguity. An opinionated formatter could resolve some of this.