We did reach consensus on these items among those present, but since Mark wasn't present at the last meeting, we didn't consider the decisions made as final yet. I will discuss these items with Mark next week. If no new issues arise, I don't see a problem with these items promoting to proposal status after next meeting. We probably also need to iterate on these strawmen in light of the issues raised in the other thread on the "receiver" argument.
Cheers, Tom 2011/4/28 David Bruant <[email protected]> > A couple of things have been discussed and decided related to proxies > during the last TC39 meeting. Notes have been added on the following pages: > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:proxy_derived_traps > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:handler_access_to_proxy > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:proxy_set_trap > > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:derived_traps_forwarding_handler > > Should they be moved to proposals? > > David > > Le 28/04/2011 12:08, Brendan Eich a écrit : > > Thanks to Waldemar again for his notes. These plus my memory were the >> basis of all my recent edits. I moved strawmen to proposals and left >> forwarding pages (in case of external links). In the course of this, I >> improved and tested some of the self-hosted specs, e.g. Number.isInteger. >> Anyone motivated and capable, please check my work: >> >> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?do=recent&id= >> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proposals >> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:strawman >> >> Thanks, >> >> /be >> > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
