3 ms·
> The evidence is in the usage. That's not what I asked for. You're asking me to accept a concrete proposition that I obviously don't. To sway me, I'd like pro
by KirinDave 8y ago
> The evidence is in the usage.
That's not what I asked for. You're asking me to accept a concrete proposition that I obviously don't. To sway me, I'd like proof, not a single example labeled evidence.
- xapata 8y agoProof? Describe what proof means to you. The fact that Javascript decided not to adopt the syntax seems like good evidence to me. I'm not asking you to do anything. I'm offering you some insights. Normally people pay me for my time, but I suppose I feel like volunteering at the moment.
- KirinDave 8y agoThe fact that python decided to use a different syntax doesn't prove that it was good either. What you volunteered to me is a mirror image of an argument you think I presented, then suggested my version was wrong. But I'm not actually advocating for JavaScript syntax here. I just don't think list comprehension syntax, as presented by python, is particularly better in comparison. You said it's much better, then demanded that I agree with you.
- xapata 8y agoDemanded? I ain't demanding shit. Certainly not of a stranger on the internet.