Braceless object return

[zdzolton]

I'd like to be able to return an object literal from a function without typing any braces:

makeAwesome = (what, ever) ->
  stuff = doStuff what, ever
  return
    foo: what
    bar: doMore stuff
    baz: stuff

Right now, you have to do this:

makeAwesome = (what, ever) ->
  stuff = doStuff what, ever
  return {
    foo: what
    bar: doMore stuff
    baz: stuff
  }

Not terrible, but come on... We don't wanna type no stinking braces! LOL

Actually, this is legal but I think it looks confusing:

makeAwesome = (what, ever) ->
  stuff = doStuff what, ever
  foo: what
  bar: doMore stuff
  baz: stuff

[OnesimusUnbound]

How about separating the object to be returned by one line? I think it's readable.

makeAwesome = (what, ever) ->
  stuff = doStuff what, ever

  foo: what
  bar: doMore stuff
  baz: stuff

[erisdev]

The way it is now is inconsistent with the rest of the language—function calls, assignment, nested objects—so yeah, this should probably be fixed.

The implicit return separated by an empty line is readable, but not as clear as it could be. Additionally, while it is a passable workaround for the usual case, it can't help you when you need to put an explicit return somewhere.

[zdzolton]

Also, given CoffeeScript's lack of surrounding braces or keywords for
a function block, I prefer not to put blank lines in the middle of my
functions. Having them visually together makes my mind consider it as
one unit, which helps me to understand the code's organization.

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 11:28 PM, erisdiscord
[email protected]
wrote:

The way it is now is inconsistent with the rest of the language—function calls, assignment, nested objects—so yeah, this should probably be fixed.

The implicit return separated by an empty line is readable, but not as clear as it could be. Additionally, while it is a passable workaround for the usual case, it can't help you when you need to put an explicit return somewhere.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#1263 (comment)

[satyr]

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4907625/how-to-return-object-explicitly-in-coffeescript

[zdzolton]

I'm sorry @satyr, I must have been unclear in my original post—I
wouldn't waste everyone's time by asking something that could be
answered by a Google search! (^_^)

I'm asking for comments on potentially amending CoffeeScript's
return syntax to allow for returning a multiline object literal from
a function without having to use braces (or parens or one-lining the
whole object).

Given that you can already pass an object literal to a function call like this:

someFunc
  foo: 42
  bar: true
  baz: 'ok'

It feels natural to be able to do the same thing with returning an
object from a function, as in my original post.

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:25 PM, satyr
[email protected]
wrote:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4907625/how-to-return-object-explicitly-in-coffeescript

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#1263 (comment)

[satyr]

someFunc
  foo: 42

Note that this syntax is an inconsitency in the language (there are lingering issues with it). Adding another similar specialcase may worsen the situation. (What about throw?)

[michaelficarra]

See #1113, a function call with an implicit object is a special case. @satyr's suggestions (from stackoverflow) seem fine to me.

[jashkenas]

Yep -- agreed -- I don't think we really need to be adding an additional special case for this.

[joeytwiddle]

If you really need this style, you can do:

  return \
    foo: what
    bar: doMore stuff
    baz: stuff

[michaelficarra]

@jashkenas: why the re-open?

[jashkenas]

Because we're thinking about fixing this in that other ticket.

Although we can certainly close one of them as a dupe, if you like.

[satyr]

If you really need this style, you can do:

  return \
    foo: what
    bar: doMore stuff
    baz: stuff

Not really.

$ coffee -cs
  return \
    foo: what
    bar: doMore stuff
    baz: stuff

(function() {

  return {
    foo: what
  };

  ({
    bar: doMore(stuff),
    baz: stuff
  });

}).call(this);

[erisdev]

@satyr haha, subtle, wow.

[markjaquith]

I've taken to using this for explicit early returns:

return {} =
  here: 'is'
  my:   'object'

...and this for implicit object returns:

{} =
  here: 'is'
  my:   'object'

(that second one not being mentioned on the StackOverflow thread).

[GeoffreyBooth]

I’ve noticed that this bug is the root of several similar issues. I’m trying to trace it down but not having much luck so far. Parsing/lexing experts, can anyone tell me why this:

throw
  a: 1
  b: 2

compiles as you’d expect, but if you replace throw with return or export default, the latter two throw error: unexpected indentation?

EDIT: Looks like it’s in lexer.coffee, lineToken and unfinished.