5 ms·
It's the mix of old-school brace syntax, with the omitted parens which makes it look off to me.
by cloudhead 15y ago
It's the mix of old-school brace syntax, with the omitted parens which makes it look off to me.
- endergen 15y agoI can't think of anyway to get around once you add Static Typing. Dynamic languages have much more bare function/object definitions. Haskell does make Types look sexy on the other hand. So yes there could have been some borrowing from there.
- andrewflnr 15y agoI personally kinda like that decision. You don't need both parens and braces to remove ambiguity. Since braces are useful for denoting code blocks, parens are basically noise. I'm not a language expert, so if anyone can correct me on the theory I would appreciate it.