We try to record these in the strawman or proposal page itself:
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?do=search&id=+rationale
I agree that a global summary/review could be good too if it is
maintained/curated assiduously. Possibly this is better done based on
distributed and champion-curated rationale parts when we are closer to
done with ES6.
The examples you cite, <| and classes, are not baked fully yet (at least
as far as syntax goes for <|, but it sounds like also for the function
special-case; and in various ways for classes). This may be related to
the need for design rationale docs. Not that rationales would clinch the
proposals as-is, rather that we'll have consensus and robust rationales
at about the same point on the hermeneutic spiral (assuming we choose
the right paths!).
Allen wrote a rationale doc for the design of the ES5 Object
meta-programming API:
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/lib/exe/fetch.php?id=es3.1%3Aes3.1_proposal_working_draft&cache=cache&media=es3.1:rationale_for_es3_1_static_object_methodsaug26.pdf
It is still helpful but not complete -- in particular no reconciliation
with ES5 user experience, reflection (pun!) on configurable, etc.
defaults being falsy => Object.create/defineProperty being verbose, etc.
I find that when my memory fails me, I have to follow breadcrumbs in the
wiki and even here on es-discuss. This too suggests rolling up a
consolidated rationale document (wiki markdown, nothing fancy) when we
are closer to done.
/be
Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
Now that the memories are still fresh – would it make sense to record
how some of the design decisions were arrived at? I’d expect that to
help with future feature additions and with reducing the amount of
questions being asked on es-discuss. Examples: What names of the <|
operator have been rejected and why? Why don’t class declarations have
feature X? Etc.
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
