On 12 October 2011 02:32, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected]> wrote: > The experiments are shown > in http://wiki.ecmascript.org/lib/exe/fetch.php?id=harmony%3Aspecification_drafts&cache=cache&media=harmony:11.1.5-alternatives.pdf > This contains four versions of section 11.5.1 (Object literals). Each > section is about 4 pages long and contains the same specification text, but > organized in slightly different ways. > The first version is what is currently in the specification. All the > semantics definitions are lumped together in a single "Semantics" section in > roughly the same order as the productions occur in the grammar. Each > definition includes the grammar production it applies to so the order > doesn't have any semantic significance. > The second version regroups the semantic functions according to semantic > function. First there are all the static semantic definitions for all the > productions. Then all the PropertyDefinitionList function definitions for > the productions that define it, and so until finally there are the > evaluation function definitions for all the productions. > The third version is ordered just like the second version but it uses > explicit subsection headings for each function group in order to make them > more visible. > The four version orders everything by grammar production. It shows a > production and immediately has all the functions that apply to that > production.
The third version seems far superior. It makes a proper, visible separation between static semantics and dynamic semantics, which is very helpful, and standard practice as well. In fact, you could be even more consistent about the triptych syntax/static semantics/dynamic semantics by grouping all of the latter in a subsection as well. That would be my preferred structure. (If you worry about having too many levels of numbering you might want to avoid numbering the individual bits of the dynamic semantics in that case. I think their section numbers are a minor concern.) (BTW, in addition to a better structure, I have to agree with Claus that having hyperlinks in the PDF would be a real blessing. I don't know how much work that would be, though.) /Andreas _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
