Why the (CoffeeScript) arrow matters
blog.gadr.me
blog.gadr.me
I think you meant 'sensible' there.
I actually find the cs arrows a lot more useful than the es6 short-hand function definition, because a lot of the time I want to do be able to do composition, and the es6 one always binds the scope to where it's defined.
I love named functions otherwise, which ease debugging and understandability. I actually don't care for implicit returns, not just because i prefer being explicit, but because it's the cause of some very weird bugs at times.
Didn't know that about the new ES6 functions. I'll check it out.
Yes, named functions do improve debugging... But I guess it's worth the trade. I have come across very confusing code thanks to named functions.
var funcName = function(){}
function funcName(){}
This is not idiomatic. Many developers only use named functions.
The obvious reason is they make stack traces far more readable, though you can get around this by naming functions anyway:
var myFunction = function myFunction() {}
Pushing utility functions to the bottom of the current file is another reason to use a modular js architecture.
My takeaway is that it is wise to avoid using named expressions, but fine to stick with anonymous function assignments, or declared functions. To add a third example to your list:
var funcName = function(){};
function funcName(){}
var funcName = function funcName(){}; // <-- Danger!