> It all has to do with this line: "By providing syntactic sugar for these use cases we will enable a new class of "virtual method" library, which will have usa

> It all has to do with this line: "By providing syntactic sugar for these use cases we will enable a new class of "virtual method" library, which will have usability advantages over the standard adapter patterns in use today." There is nothing that this proposal does that cannot be done today. It brings nothing new to the table aside from operator noise. I hope the committee pushes against these exotic features, like the bind operator or the pipe operator. > Right now functional libraries like static-land, ramda, sanctuary, etc. are working hard to provide these functional primitives but it's still painful to write readable code that uses these. No it's not. explicit != painful . Do people really want to end up with a spec of the size of C++ spec ?