On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Mark S. Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> The text for SetMutableBinding in table 17 is correct: > > [...] If S is true and > the binding cannot be set throw a TypeError exception. S is > used to identify strict mode references. > > > supporting the notion that the text in 10.2.1.1.3 is an errata. > > Or rather, is a mistake to be fixed in an errata ;). > > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:27 PM, Mark S. Miller <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> On Jun 5, 2010, at 9:41 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote: >>> >>> Am I misunderstanding something, or 2) was this the intended spec, or 3) >>> are these three browsers all non-conformant in the same manner? If the 3rd, >>> I'll file bugs on this. If the 2nd, should we add a correction to the ES5 >>> errata? >>> >>> >>> Whatever happened to "don't break the web"? :-P >>> >>> The ES3 spec has no exception here. If ES5 introduced an incompatible >>> change, we should issue an erratum. >>> >> >> +1. I suggest replacing the text I quote above with >> >> If the binding is an immutable binding and S is true, then a TypeError is >> thrown. >> >> >> And algorithmic step 4: >> >> 4. Else this must be an attempt to change the value of an immutable >> binding so throw a TypeError exception. >> >> >> should be changed to >> >> >> 4. Else this must be an attempt to change the value of an immutable >> binding, so >> >> a. If S is true, throw a TypeError exception. >> >> >> >>> /be >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> --MarkM >> > > > > -- > Cheers, > --MarkM > -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
