help

> On Oct 26, 2016, at 12:43 AM, es-discuss-requ...@mozilla.org wrote: > > Send es-discuss mailing list submissions to > es-discuss@mozilla.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > or, via email, send a message

Re: Standardize ES Worker

I agree that we need additional modification from WebWorker spec. What I mean on the first post is that we (likely) can make standard Worker spec as a (mostly) subset of WebWorker spec so current codes using WebWorker need not to be changed. Anyway, can you explain it more about mismatch between

Re: Symbol description inference

IMO, the real problem that needs solving is macros. Macro-based definition of a symbol could trivially reuse the name. On Tuesday, 25 October 2016, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > Function name inferencing is possible because function definitions are all > syntactic special

Re: Standardize ES Worker

Maybe with modification. I currently feel workers are a bit heavy (with their event driven nature), and they most definitely don't follow the idioms of the modern JavaScript language (very promise heavy). On Sun, Oct 23, 2016, 02:11 Park Hyeonu wrote: > Now we're about to

Re: Symbol description inference

Function name inferencing is possible because function definitions are all syntactic special forms that can be unambiguously identified during parsing. Symbols creation is just a function call so there is no way to reliably detect it. `Symbol` might aliased to some other name by assignment, a

Symbol description inference

So, we have function name inference, like ``` const funcs = { foo: () => {} } funcs.foo.name === 'foo' // true ``` and this inference also works similarly with `const foo = () => {}` and such. So, how about Symbol description inference, like: ``` const symbols: { foo: Symbol(), bar: