On Apr 19, 2011, at 3:27 PM, John Tamplin wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Yes. We've discussed this. It's not a change in semantics due to the > error-correction aspect of ASI. There is no ASI on this concatenated input! > > Yes, but given that ASI encourages developers to omit semicolons except when > absolutely required, it is nevertheless a consequence of ASI. If ASI did not > exist, the would be no missing semicolons.
That is true but not what was claimed. Please stick to the argument we were having. The claim was two semantics, A and B, for a given program, due to ASI. That is false and I don't see anyone seriously claiming otherwise. Two semantics for two different programs, one an extension of the other by source concatenation, is a problem. Now, if you want to use that as a trump card to argue a different argument, that we should get rid of ASI, then lotsa luck! ASI is not going away in any forseeable non-opt-in version of the language. Given this fact, should we bemoan it or make only a "no asi" pragma and hope people use that under opt-in (where the pragma is allowed), and waste too much of their lives on adding semicolons when migrating code, etc.? Or should we consider that the problems created by ASI might better be solved by evolving ASI in a backward-compatible fashion, so old code migrates with the same meaning (or at most an early error, for a hard case) into Harmony, and new code is free of some or all of the hazards this thread has identified? I say the latter wins. Just a "no asi" pragma may happen too, but it ain't gonna improve the lives of enough JS hackers to matter, IMHO. /be
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
