syntax for assigning to an array

Discussion in 'Javascript' started by miken32, Nov 27, 2007.

  1. miken32

    miken32 Guest

    In PHP, if a function returns an array it's fairly common to capture
    its return values like this:

    <?php
    list($foo, $bar, $baz) = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    ?>

    In Javascript, would the equivalent (acceptable) code be this?

    [foo, bar, baz] = some_function_that_return_an_array();

    I usually run my code through JSLint as a quick sanity check, but this
    expression makes it die. Clearly it's a parsing bug in JSLint, but I
    also wanted to make sure that I wasn't doing something completely off
    the wall. Thanks.
    miken32, Nov 27, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. miken32

    miken32 Guest

    On Nov 27, 12:58 pm, Randy Webb <> wrote:
    > miken32 said the following on 11/27/2007 2:52 PM:
    >
    > > In PHP, if a function returns an array it's fairly common to capture
    > > its return values like this:

    >
    > > <?php
    > > list($foo, $bar, $baz) = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > > ?>

    >
    > > In Javascript, would the equivalent (acceptable) code be this?

    >
    > > [foo, bar, baz] = some_function_that_return_an_array();

    >
    > var theArray = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > alert('theArray is now an array')
    >
    > > I usually run my code through JSLint as a quick sanity check, but this
    > > expression makes it die.

    >
    > It doesn't die, it generates a message:
    >
    > Problem at line 1 character 2: Expected a JSON value.
    >
    > > Clearly it's a parsing bug in JSLint,

    >
    > No it isn't.
    >
    > > but I also wanted to make sure that I wasn't doing something
    > > completely off the wall.

    >
    > You aren't even in the house to be off the wall :)
    >
    > > Thanks.

    >
    > Welcome.
    >
    > --
    > Randy
    > Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
    > comp.lang.javascript FAQ -http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
    > Javascript Best Practices -http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/


    I'm using Safari, and if I try to validate this code:

    var a, b, c, d = 'one two three';
    [a, b, c] = d.split(' ');

    I get "Problem at line 151 character 13: Undefined value"

    May just be a problem with my browser's JS engine I guess.
    miken32, Nov 27, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. miken32

    Kailash Nadh Guest

    On Nov 27, 8:58 pm, miken32 <> wrote:
    > On Nov 27, 12:58 pm, Randy Webb <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > > miken32 said the following on 11/27/2007 2:52 PM:

    >
    > > > In PHP, if a function returns an array it's fairly common to capture
    > > > its return values like this:

    >
    > > > <?php
    > > > list($foo, $bar, $baz) = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > > > ?>

    >
    > > > In Javascript, would the equivalent (acceptable) code be this?

    >
    > > > [foo, bar, baz] = some_function_that_return_an_array();

    >
    > > var theArray = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > > alert('theArray is now an array')

    >
    > > > I usually run my code through JSLint as a quick sanity check, but this
    > > > expression makes it die.

    >
    > > It doesn't die, it generates a message:

    >
    > > Problem at line 1 character 2: Expected a JSON value.

    >
    > > > Clearly it's a parsing bug in JSLint,

    >
    > > No it isn't.

    >
    > > > but I also wanted to make sure that I wasn't doing something
    > > > completely off the wall.

    >
    > > You aren't even in the house to be off the wall :)

    >
    > > > Thanks.

    >
    > > Welcome.

    >
    > > --
    > > Randy
    > > Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
    > > comp.lang.javascript FAQ -http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
    > > Javascript Best Practices -http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/

    >
    > I'm using Safari, and if I try to validate this code:
    >
    > var a, b, c, d = 'one two three';
    > [a, b, c] = d.split(' ');


    [] is for carrying the values of an array really.
    eg: var a = [1,2,3];

    I don't think there is a shorthand for what you are trying to do,
    unless ofcourse, you'd use a[0], [1].. instead of a,b,c.. OR assigning
    the values manually to the variables after the split()

    >
    > I get "Problem at line 151 character 13: Undefined value"
    >
    > May just be a problem with my browser's JS engine I guess.


    --
    Kailash Nadh | http://kailashnadh.name
    Kailash Nadh, Nov 27, 2007
    #3
  4. "miken32" wrote:
    > On Nov 27, 12:58 pm, Randy Webb wrote:
    >> miken32 said the following on 11/27/2007 2:52 PM:
    >>
    >>> In PHP, if a function returns an array it's fairly
    >>> common to capture its return values like this:

    >>
    >>> <?php
    >>> list($foo, $bar, $baz) = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    >>> ?>


    You have posted this PHP to a javascript group without any explanation as to what it is actually
    doing. It is not very relational to assume that people who know javascript will also know PHP.
    Would you make that assumption the other way around? Saying things like "capture its return
    values" doesn't really help. In javascript terms a function/method call that "returns an array"
    returns a single value and that value is the array object. If you want that array you assign the
    value to a variable or the property of an object, giving you a variable or property of an object
    that refers to an array object.

    <snip>
    > I'm using Safari, and if I try to validate this code:


    "Validate"? Do you mean execute?

    > var a, b, c, d = 'one two three';
    > [a, b, c] = d.split(' ');


    That last line is just a syntax error. The - [a, b, c] - is an Array literal (defines an array
    object with 3 elements containing, in tern, the values of the local variables a, b and c (which
    are all the undefined value at this point)). The evaluation of the Array literal results in a
    value, and there is no sense in which assigning another value to a value can work, and it is
    also forbidden by the syntax rules.

    > I get "Problem at line 151 character 13: Undefined value"


    But don't intend letting on to us which line line 151 is.

    > May just be a problem with my browser's JS engine I guess.


    An error is inevitable because of the syntax error in the code, which error (in terms of the
    exact wording) will depend on the JS engine. But I think the error you report is the last error
    generated, while it is the first error generate that should always be the first error addressed
    (as all subsequent errors may be a direct consequence of the first).

    Richard.
    Richard Cornford, Nov 27, 2007
    #4
  5. miken32

    miken32 Guest

    On Nov 27, 3:39 pm, Randy Webb <> wrote:
    > miken32 said the following on 11/27/2007 3:58 PM:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Nov 27, 12:58 pm, Randy Webb <> wrote:
    > >> miken32 said the following on 11/27/2007 2:52 PM:

    >
    > >>> In PHP, if a function returns an array it's fairly common to capture
    > >>> its return values like this:
    > >>> <?php
    > >>> list($foo, $bar, $baz) = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > >>> ?>
    > >>> In Javascript, would the equivalent (acceptable) code be this?
    > >>> [foo, bar, baz] = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > >> var theArray = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > >> alert('theArray is now an array')

    >
    > >>> I usually run my code through JSLint as a quick sanity check, but this
    > >>> expression makes it die.
    > >> It doesn't die, it generates a message:

    >
    > >> Problem at line 1 character 2: Expected a JSON value.

    >
    > >>> Clearly it's a parsing bug in JSLint,
    > >> No it isn't.

    >
    > >>> but I also wanted to make sure that I wasn't doing something
    > >>> completely off the wall.
    > >> You aren't even in the house to be off the wall :)

    >
    > >>> Thanks.
    > >> Welcome.

    >
    > > I'm using Safari, and if I try to validate this code:

    >
    > > var a, b, c, d = 'one two three';
    > > [a, b, c] = d.split(' ');

    >
    > <sigh> I give you code to do exactly what you want and you still try to
    > fubar it.
    >
    > var myArray = d.split(' ');
    >
    > Now, myArray is an array that you wanted. You need to stop thinking PHP
    > and start learning the JS way if you want to write JS.
    >
    > > I get "Problem at line 151 character 13: Undefined value"

    >
    > GIGO.
    >
    > > May just be a problem with my browser's JS engine I guess.

    >
    > No, it is a major problem with your code.
    >
    > --
    > Randy
    > Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
    > comp.lang.javascript FAQ -http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
    > Javascript Best Practices -http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/


    I understand that's not the way to do it, no need for sarcasm and
    sighs!

    I was reposting similarly incorrect code to highlight the parsing
    error in JSLint; I guess I wasn't clear enough, but the error message
    was coming from JSLint, not my browser. Clearly if I'm validating 2
    lines of JS and it reports an error on line 151 something's wrong, and
    I'll send an email to alert him to the problem.

    And I promise with all my heart that I will take the extra lines of
    code to explicitly assign elements of the returned array to variables.
    Thanks.
    miken32, Nov 27, 2007
    #5
  6. miken32

    slebetman Guest

    On Nov 28, 3:52 am, miken32 <> wrote:
    > In PHP, if a function returns an array it's fairly common to capture
    > its return values like this:
    >
    > <?php
    > list($foo, $bar, $baz) = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > ?>
    >
    > In Javascript, would the equivalent (acceptable) code be this?
    >
    > [foo, bar, baz] = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    >


    As others have replied, and you have found out for yourself by trying
    to run this in a browser, that's not valid javascript. The acceptable
    equivalent is:

    var tmp = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    foo = tmp[0];
    bar = tmp[1];
    baz = tmp[2];

    However, you can emulate a similar functionality with a Tcl style
    syntax rather than PHP's Perl style syntax:

    function assign (thearray) {
    for (var i=1; i < arguments.length; i++) {
    eval (arguments + '=' + thearray[i-1])
    }
    }

    # The syntax to use this would be:

    assign(function_return_array(), 'foo', 'bar', 'baz');
    slebetman, Nov 27, 2007
    #6
  7. Randy Webb wrote:
    > Richard Cornford said the following on 11/27/2007 5:09 PM:
    > <snip>
    >> An error is inevitable because of the syntax error in the
    >> code, which error (in terms of the exact wording) will
    >> depend on the JS engine. But I think the error you report
    >> is the last error generated, while it is the first error
    >> generate that should always be the first error addressed (as all subsequent errors may be a
    >> direct consequence of
    >> the first).

    >
    > Typically, and in experience, the first error reported is
    > usually the first error encountered. Do you know of a UA
    > that will report the last error encountered instead of
    > the first error?


    I know of at leas some browsers where the report of one error is replaced by the report of the
    next, and so when everything grinds to a halt and someone looks at the errors reported they are
    actually looking at the last error (and usually an active 'back' button that can be used to look
    at the previous errors).

    The syntax error in the code posted would not produce the error reported, but the error reported
    could easily be the consequence of the syntax error stopping the compiling of all the SCRIPT
    contents where it appeared.

    Richard.
    Richard Cornford, Nov 27, 2007
    #7
  8. slebetman wrote:
    > On Nov 28, 3:52 am, miken32 <> wrote:
    >> In PHP, if a function returns an array it's fairly common to capture
    >> its return values like this:
    >>
    >> <?php
    >> list($foo, $bar, $baz) = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    >> ?>
    >>
    >> In Javascript, would the equivalent (acceptable) code be this?
    >>
    >> [foo, bar, baz] = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    >>

    >
    > As others have replied, and you have found out for yourself by trying
    > to run this in a browser, that's not valid javascript. [...]


    That depends how you understand "javascript". JavaScript 1.7 as implemented
    in Gecko 1.8.1 (Firefox 2 etc.) allows this:

    http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/New_in_JavaScript_1.7#Destructuring_assignment


    PointedEars
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, Nov 27, 2007
    #8
  9. miken32

    slebetman Guest

    On Nov 28, 1:22 pm, Randy Webb <> wrote:
    > Randy Webb said the following on 11/27/2007 6:27 PM:
    >
    > > slebetman said the following on 11/27/2007 5:57 PM:

    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > >> function assign (thearray) {
    > >> for (var i=1; i < arguments.length; i++) {
    > >> eval (arguments + '=' + thearray[i-1])

    >
    > > arguments = thearray[i-1]

    >
    > Although that should be:
    >
    > window[arguments] = thearray[i-1];
    >


    That only works for global variables. Wouldn't work for local
    variables. Using 'eval' is the only way I can think of doing it:

    function testme () {
    var x;
    var y;
    assign([1,2,3,4],'x','y');
    }
    slebetman, Nov 28, 2007
    #9
  10. miken32 a écrit :
    > In PHP, if a function returns an array it's fairly common to capture
    > its return values like this:
    >
    > <?php
    > list($foo, $bar, $baz) = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > ?>


    <ot>
    For those that don't know PHP:

    list($a, $b, $c) = array(1, 2, 3);

    is equivalent to:

    $x = array(1, 2, 3);
    $a = $x[0];
    $b = $x[1];
    $c = $x[2];

    </ot>

    > In Javascript, would the equivalent (acceptable) code be this?
    >
    > [foo, bar, baz] = some_function_that_return_an_array();


    No. There's no such thing in javascript. Anyway, if the ordering in your
    array is signifiant (ie: your array is really a tuple, IOW an
    index-based record), then you should consider returning an object instead:

    var obj = someFuncThatReturnsAnObj();
    alert(obj.foo + "\n" + obj.bar +"\n" + obj.baaz);

    Even if you can't modify some_function_that_return_an_array, you can at
    least wrap it:

    function someFuncThatReturnsAnObj() {
    var ar = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    return {
    foo: ar[0],
    bar: ar[1],
    baaz: ar[2]
    };
    }

    HTH
    Bruno Desthuilliers, Nov 28, 2007
    #10
  11. Re: OT: A bit o' PHP. Re: syntax for assigning to an array

    Randy Webb a écrit :
    (snip -lost explanations about PHP's list() function)
    >
    > And all this time, I just referred to the entry in the array I wanted. I
    > could see a possible benefit of it but not entirely sure I would ever
    > use it in JS.


    <ot mode='again'>

    Python has a similar (yet a bit cleaner IMHO) concept named 'tuple
    unpacking', which let you emulate "multiple return values":

    def some_func():
    return 1, 'toto', 42

    id, name, age = some_func()


    It's also handy for value swapping:

    a = 1
    b = 2

    a, b = b, a

    </ot>

    And FWIW, I'd certainly use it in javascript too if it was available !-)
    Bruno Desthuilliers, Nov 28, 2007
    #11
  12. miken32

    VK Guest

    On Nov 27, 10:52 pm, miken32 <> wrote:
    > In PHP, if a function returns an array it's fairly common to capture
    > its return values like this:
    >
    > <?php
    > list($foo, $bar, $baz) = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > ?>
    >
    > In Javascript, would the equivalent (acceptable) code be this?
    >
    > [foo, bar, baz] = some_function_that_return_an_array();


    [args] in JavaScript is an implicit Array constructor call.
    Constructor call cannot be left-hand side of the assignment, so this
    PHP feature borrowed from Perl is not available in JavaScript: or so I
    thought till now...

    In this code snippet:
    var foo,bar,baz;
    try {
    [foo, bar, baz] = [1,2,3];
    alert(foo);
    }
    catch(e) {
    alert(e.number & 0xFFFF);
    }

    IE reports - totally correct - run-time error error 5008 "Illegal
    assignment".

    To my huge surprise Firefox is all happy with that with foo, bar, baz
    initiated with the respective values of the anonymous array, just like
    there is not ECMA anymore but all Perl around.

    It is funny that for say
    new Array('foo') = new Array(1);
    Gecko gets back the reality/standards and reports "illegal assignment
    left-hand side". Well, thanks for that at least...

    Evidently some of Gecko JavaScript engine developers came from Perl/
    PHP grounds so it just added a feature he used so do to not be
    bothered with language/standards differences.
    VK, Nov 28, 2007
    #12
  13. miken32

    slebetman Guest

    On Nov 28, 10:49 pm, VK <> wrote:
    > On Nov 27, 10:52 pm, miken32 <> wrote:
    >
    > > In PHP, if a function returns an array it's fairly common to capture
    > > its return values like this:

    >
    > > <?php
    > > list($foo, $bar, $baz) = some_function_that_return_an_array();
    > > ?>

    [snip]
    >
    > In this code snippet:
    > var foo,bar,baz;
    > try {
    > [foo, bar, baz] = [1,2,3];
    > alert(foo);
    > }
    > catch(e) {
    > alert(e.number & 0xFFFF);
    > }
    >
    > IE reports - totally correct - run-time error error 5008 "Illegal
    > assignment".
    >
    > To my huge surprise Firefox is all happy with that with foo, bar, baz
    > initiated with the respective values of the anonymous array,


    Which is also totally correct (read on..)

    >
    > Evidently some of Gecko JavaScript engine developers came from Perl/
    > PHP grounds so it just added a feature he used so do to not be
    > bothered with language/standards differences.


    Not really from Perl. (OK, yes from Perl but it's valid Javascript).
    As Thomas mentioned it's actually from Javascript 1.7 / ECMAScript 4.
    Unfortunately no other browser apart from Firefox currently implements
    Javascript 1.7.
    slebetman, Nov 28, 2007
    #13
  14. miken32

    slebetman Guest

    On Nov 28, 6:21 pm, Randy Webb <> wrote:
    > slebetman said the following on 11/28/2007 4:11 AM:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Nov 28, 1:22 pm, Randy Webb <> wrote:
    > >> Randy Webb said the following on 11/27/2007 6:27 PM:

    >
    > >>> slebetman said the following on 11/27/2007 5:57 PM:
    > >> <snip>

    >
    > >>>> function assign (thearray) {
    > >>>> for (var i=1; i < arguments.length; i++) {
    > >>>> eval (arguments + '=' + thearray[i-1])
    > >>> arguments = thearray[i-1]
    > >> Although that should be:

    >
    > >> window[arguments] = thearray[i-1];

    >
    > > That only works for global variables.

    >
    > True, but, it is reliable. See below.
    >
    > > Wouldn't work for local variables.

    >
    > True again.
    >
    > > Using 'eval' is the only way I can think of doing it:

    >
    > Did you test it? FF2, IE7, Opera9 all give undefined for the alerts below.


    Admittedly I didn't test it when I wrote it.

    >
    > > function testme () {
    > > var x;
    > > var y;
    > > assign([1,2,3,4],'x','y');

    >
    > alert(x)// undefined
    > alert(y)// undefined
    >
    > > }

    >
    > Test code:
    >
    > function assign (thearray) {
    > for (var i=1; i < arguments.length; i++) {
    > eval (arguments + '=' + thearray[i-1])
    > }}
    >
    > function testme () {
    > var x;
    > var y;
    > assign([1,2,3,4],'x','y');
    > alert(x)
    > alert(y)}
    >
    > testme()
    >



    Hmm.. strange. I just tested it right now in IE6, Firefox, Opera9 and
    Safari and it works. I don't know why it fails on your machine.

    Here's my test file which works:

    <script>
    function assign (thearray) {
    for (var i=1; i < arguments.length; i++) {
    eval (arguments + '=' + thearray[i-1])
    }
    }

    function testme () {
    assign([1,2,3,4],'x','y','z');
    alert(y);
    alert(z);
    }

    testme();

    /* Not much different from yours so I'm
    * not sure why yours isn't working.
    * As for why you'd want something like
    * this, well.. some people like syntactic
    * sugar others have different tastes.
    */
    </script>
    slebetman, Nov 28, 2007
    #14
  15. miken32

    VK Guest

    On Nov 28, 2:48 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <>
    wrote:
    > That depends how you understand "javascript".


    As some ECMAScript-compliant (up to the best of authors' talents)
    implementation. ECMAScript specs allow extensions and even extra
    keywords. At the same time it doesn't assume that someone will make a
    totally different language, still call it "JavaScript" and start
    parsing <script> blocks by the rules of such language. No one language
    spec goes so far - and for some good I guess. Other words one may add
    someVeryCoolMethod to Global and it's OK, just document it properly.
    From the other side one cannot say allow "this" or constructor itself
    to be in the left-hand side of assignment just because someone's hands
    are overly itchy tonight. For itchy hands of this kind there is
    project manager to hit by his stick on time. Starting from Gecko
    JavaScript 1.6 and especially 1.7 I'm getting more and more
    disappointed by the engine project manager up to the point to start
    wondering if there is one at all...

    > http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/New_in_JavaScript_1.7#Destructuring_assignment


    Just makes my points. "JavaScript sucks, I'm used to PHP (Perl) with
    is cool, so I'll call it Destructuring_Assignment and kiss my a**".
    VK, Nov 28, 2007
    #15
  16. miken32

    VK Guest

    > http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/New_in_JavaScript_1.7#Destructuring_assignment

    > Just makes my points. "JavaScript sucks, I'm used to PHP (Perl) with
    > is cool, so I'll call it Destructuring_Assignment and kiss my a**".



    http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/New_in_JavaScript_1.7#Using_JavaScript_1.7

    "In order to use some of the new features of JavaScript 1.7, you need
    to specify that you wish to use JavaScript 1.7. In HTML or XUL code,
    use:
    <script type="application/javascript;version=1.7"/>
    "

    Uhm... Did we use this type? I see that not but 1.7 is still in all
    its "beauty"

    I hope Mozilla at least will issue some small warning at the day then
    they will decide to remove .prototype property from objects or
    something equally revolutionary.
    VK, Nov 28, 2007
    #16
  17. miken32

    slebetman Guest

    On Nov 29, 12:31 am, VK <> wrote:
    > On Nov 28, 2:48 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > > That depends how you understand "javascript".

    >
    > As some ECMAScript-compliant (up to the best of authors' talents)
    > implementation. ECMAScript specs allow extensions and even extra
    > keywords. At the same time it doesn't assume that someone will make a
    > totally different language, still call it "JavaScript"..


    Not a "totally different language" per se. Javascript 1.7 only updates
    Javascript to include most of the features of the latest ECMAScript
    spec. This is actually fully valid ECMAScript 4. ECMAScript 4 is still
    currently in draft/proposal mode but I don't see much objections to
    the proposal so far so it's on track for formal approval. AFAIK the
    only two languages based on ECMAScript that have been updated to
    include ECMAScript 4 features are Javascript 1.7 and Actionscript 3
    (Flash/Flex, though Actionscript3 doesn't support array
    destructuring).
    slebetman, Nov 28, 2007
    #17
  18. miken32

    slebetman Guest

    On Nov 29, 8:48 am, Randy Webb <> wrote:
    > slebetman said the following on 11/28/2007 11:14 AM:
    >
    > > On Nov 28, 6:21 pm, Randy Webb <> wrote:
    > >> slebetman said the following on 11/28/2007 4:11 AM:

    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > >> function testme () {
    > >> var x;
    > >> var y;
    > >> assign([1,2,3,4],'x','y');
    > >> alert(x)
    > >> alert(y)}

    >
    > >> testme()

    >
    > > Hmm.. strange. I just tested it right now in IE6, Firefox, Opera9 and
    > > Safari and it works. I don't know why it fails on your machine.

    >
    > Because you changed the code.
    >
    > > function testme () {
    > > assign([1,2,3,4],'x','y','z');
    > > alert(y);
    > > alert(z);
    > > }

    >
    > Compare the two. The difference in the two is monumental.
    >


    Crap.. yeah, just realised my code actually doesn't work with local
    vars as well. Sorry.. guess the OP will have to go with the more
    traditional method.
    slebetman, Nov 29, 2007
    #18
  19. miken32

    beegee Guest

    Re: OT: A bit o' PHP. Re: syntax for assigning to an array

    On Nov 28, 8:02 am, Bruno Desthuilliers <bruno.
    > wrote:
    > Python has a similar (yet a bit cleaner IMHO) concept named 'tuple
    > unpacking', which let you emulate "multiple return values":
    >
    > def some_func():
    > return 1, 'toto', 42
    >
    > id, name, age = some_func()


    Ruby, same thing:

    id, name, age = some_func_that_returns_an_array()

    Yup, I wish it existed in Javascript too.

    Bob
    beegee, Nov 29, 2007
    #19
  20. VK wrote:
    > On Nov 28, 2:48 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <>
    > wrote:
    >> That depends how you understand "javascript".

    >
    > As some ECMAScript-compliant (up to the best of authors' talents)
    > implementation. ECMAScript specs allow extensions and even extra
    > keywords. [...]


    Unsurprisingly, you missed the point completely.

    >> http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/New_in_JavaScript_1.7#Destructuring_assignment

    >
    > Just makes my points. "JavaScript sucks, I'm used to PHP (Perl) with
    > is cool, so I'll call it Destructuring_Assignment and kiss my a**".


    Don't drink and post.


    PointedEars
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, Nov 29, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Richard Lionheart
    Replies:
    27
    Views:
    368
    Jean-Hugues ROBERT
    May 4, 2004
  2. weston
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    234
    Richard Cornford
    Sep 22, 2006
  3. bintom
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    630
    Luca Risolia
    Oct 15, 2012
  4. Myth__Buster
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    342
    Anand Hariharan
    Feb 26, 2013
  5. Myth__Buster
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    227
    Myth__Buster
    Feb 1, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page