loading...

re: Sh*tpost: can we stop saying "syntactic sugar"? VIEW POST

TOP OF THREAD FULL DISCUSSION
re: It's called syntactic sugar because it doesn't introduce any substantial new feature to the language, it's just a sweeter syntax. So yes: destruct...
 

It's only usually used for things added to the language later in my mind.
for could be "desugarred" into while for example, but we don't call for sugar in the normal run of things.

It's all a bit murky.

Code of Conduct Report abuse