Echo JS 0.11.0

<~>
albertgao 365 days ago. link parent 1 point
Yep, or to say, they are not precisely explained. Most of the explanations didn't touch the magic part. A function inside another function is hardly a magic, and if you only know the basic theory of closure, you will still don't know how to understand those famous closure examples online. This is why I wrote it.

example 2 to 3, you can consider it as another diving into.

Using `let` will make the last example meaningless, we just need to solve the legacy problem from `var`. But yes, you are right, mentioning it would be good.

And thanks for the grammar tips, fixed some of them. Hope there are much less. In the original edition, were there too many grammar mistakes? :(

Replies

MaxArt 365 days ago. link 1 point
Well, a bit, yes. Sometimes you get thrown off by some mistake that in the best case makes you stutter and distracts you, and in the worst it makes you misunderstand the meaning. As chris-l pointed out, the title itself suffers from this problem, as it sounds like you think *closures* are wrong!

I bet that's why you got 4 downvotes here, even though your article has good points.

As a non-native English speaker myself - and coming from a Romance language, too - I understand the difficulties of being fluent in English, as that's something that could be achieved with a lot of practice. Just like any other language, after all.

You write in English to make your content accessible to an international public, so it's better to get some proofreading help until you're confident to do that on your own.