luau-lang/rfcs
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/luau-lang/rfcs.git synced 2025-05-04 10:43:48 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

Spell check

Browse source 
Co-authored-by: vegorov-rbx <75688451+vegorov-rbx@users.noreply.github.com>
This commit is contained in:
boyned//Kampfkarren 2024-05-20 19:29:28 -07:00 • committed by GitHub
parent fd974c467d
commit dab751842f
Signed by: DevComp
GPG key ID: B5690EEEBB952194
1 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

6
docs/syntax-key-destructuring.md
View file

@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ local { .real as aliased } = t
local aliased = t.real
```
This helps support mutliple assignments on the same name:
This helps support multiple assignments on the same name:
```lua
local { .name as nameA } = getObject(a)
local { .name as nameB } = getObject(b)
@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ The syntax could support `.["key with spaces"]`, but this may open up a can of w
This also blocks nested destructuring, such as JavaScript's `const { a: { b } } = t` to mean `b = t.a.b`.
### Roblox - Property casing
Today in Roblox, every index doubly works with camel case, such as `part.position` being equivalent to `part.Position`. This use is considered deprecated and frowned upon. However, even with variable renaming, this becomes significantly more appealing. For example, it is common you will only want a few pieces of informaiton from a `RaycastResult`, so you might be tempted to write:
Today in Roblox, every index doubly works with camel case, such as `part.position` being equivalent to `part.Position`. This use is considered deprecated and frowned upon. However, even with variable renaming, this becomes significantly more appealing. For example, it is common you will only want a few pieces of information from a `RaycastResult`, so you might be tempted to write:
```lua
local { .position } = Workspace:Raycast(etc)
@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ local { .position } = Workspace:Raycast(etc)
### Syntax for destructuring
Many syntaxes have been proposed for destructuring. The most significant problem with any proposal is that is must be unambiguous to the reader whether or not the destructor is for **dictionaries** or for **arrays**.
Many syntaxes have been proposed for destructuring. The most significant problem with any proposal is that it must be unambiguous to the reader whether or not the destructor is for **dictionaries** or for **arrays**.
An intuitive suggestion is `local { a, b } = t`, but this syntax fails this test--it is not obvious if this is `local a = t.a` or `local a = t[1]`, regardless of whatever syntax is chosen for array destructuring (should it exist).