Why use version 6;
and not "use version 6"; ? Just to be sure ES 6 code breaks in old browsers ? And what do you mean by "opt-in for ES6" ? New syntax ? Everything in ES 6 ? I'm thinking about weakmaps: - on the one hand, you want to use native weakmaps when available so you would want to "opt-in for ES6" - but on the other hand, you could also implement a weakmap "polyfill" that wouldnt be as efficient, that would suck the memory but still work, and have it work in older browsers Therefore, setting the thing to do to "opt-in for ES6" to something not backward compatible doesn't seem like a good idea to me. On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 1:42 PM, David Bruant <bruan...@gmail.com> wrote: > I did start a related thread a while ago [1]. > > Brendan's response [2] explained a few things: > "Please read RFC 4329: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4329 > > There will be *at least* a ;version=6 parameter you can use, probably > with either application/javascript and application/ecmascript -- I have > argued that we should align version numbers." > > > "Beyond the RFC 4329 version= parameter, we also want a pragma for > in-script-content version assertion: > > use version 6;" > > See the full response [2] for full context. > > Besides an es-discuss thread, I think that what is really needed is an > harmony proposal. How to opt-in for ES6 is outside of the scope of pure > ECMAScript (especially if it's with playing with the HTML script tag > @type attribute), but let's face it, web devs need this information and > a wiki page on the topic would be handy. > > At the time of reading Brendan's response, I didn't have anything to add > on that and I still don't. Unlike HTML and CSS, JavaScript needs new > syntax features. Syntax features that are NOT backward compatible with > ES3. If you use one of these features, your script break in older > browsers (unlike new HTML elements and CSS rules). > I don't see an alternative to versionning. Smarter people are welcome to > jump in, I guess. > > David > > [1] https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2011-August/016262.html > [2] https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2011-August/016267.html > > Le 19/12/2011 11:49, Peter van der Zee a écrit : >> https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2011-December/018924.html >> >> ``use version 6;`` >> >> In which thread on esdiscuss should I have read about that? >> >> - peter >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> es-discuss@mozilla.org >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
