On Mar 26, 2012, at 3:07 , David Herman wrote: >> To be sure that would be yet more work (which should be done by the proposal >> authors, I guess), so I’m not sure it’s worth it, but it would be a great >> resource for educating the masses. > > I hope to do this as much as possible, but it's the kind of thing that makes > more sense to do when the dust settles, at least in any given area. Otherwise > you end up wasting time polishing things that are about to change anyway. And > as we go along I do try to state publicly any important rationale that needs > to be explained in order to justify the decisions made. But design at the > scale of a language covers an unimaginably huge space of alternatives, so > it's just not always feasible to capture all the micro- and macro-decisions > in real time and in a polished form.
Agree 100%. Writing this down too early would be inefficient. Once the ECMA-262 draft stabiles it could be a bit like its shadow document. Brendan’s idea of a Markdown wiki sounds right, too. It doesn’t have to have even close to the same polish as ECMA-262. -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer [email protected] home: rauschma.de twitter: twitter.com/rauschma blog: 2ality.com
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
