This syntax error is protecting against a logic error

[ljharb]

In your example:

function onRequest() {
<<<<<<< HEAD
  var screen = document.querySelector('.screen7');
=======
  var screen = document.getElementsByClassName('screen8')[0];
>>>>>>> refactor-overlay

By treating the conflict markers as comments, screen will silently be set to screen 8, instead of 7 - this could cause a much harder to triage production bug if the wrong screen got updated - perhaps because the logic below (that uses screen) did not conflict, and assumes screen 7.

[bathos]

Indeed, I don’t understand the rationale in the readme. In the event that code is somehow deployed with merge markers, the last thing I would want would be for it to be (potentially) successfully executable ... with unknown behavior.

[rkirsling]

Let's not forget what day it is. 😅

[bathos]

haha. it didn’t occur to me at all ... given this is more believable/coherent than many earnestly proposed things on e.g. esdiscuss, I think I’d readily fall for it again, too.

[rkirsling]

I did too, until I shared it with somebody who replied, "oh, I wanted to write an April Fool's proposal too!"

[ljharb]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ on the off chance it's serious, the point had to be made, and general opinion has been that april fool's day is supposed to be cancelled during covid-19 due to being in poor taste, so i thought it was better to be safe than sorry :-)

[fChristenson]

I had to reread the proposal a few times to make sure I understood everything correctly. It has to be a joke.

[ljharb]

Closing per 81f8d9c