On Oct 13, 2011, at 3:35 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
> We don't need to speculate. These failed to get rapid consensus in the May
> TC39 meeting, where they were presented. Lots of issues, see the notes.
>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2011-May/thread.html#14748
To say a bit more, since we have live strawman proposals for Harmony, these are
on the agenda. It wouldn't be kosher for an implementor to use :: for something
quite different (let's ignore E4X, shall we? ;-), or to add "guards" under
different syntax, without first at least discussing.
The http://disnetdev.com/contracts.coffee/ experiment Tim Disney did while
interning at Mozilla this summer adds another use of :: to CoffeeScript (with
jashkenas's blessing in general -- see his JSConf.eu talk). Guards could hook
up to a contract system.
My position at the May meeting was that we needed experiments with implementing
the strawman to get past some of the objections raised at the meeting.
Other objections were of the "meta-discussion #39" kind (see
http://brendaneich.com/brendaneich_content/uploads/TXJS-Talk.012.png), which
don't lead anywhere quickly.
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
