On 15 June 2012 08:09, Andreas Rossberg <[email protected]> wrote: > On 15 June 2012 01:22, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected]> wrote: > > A wonder if this wart is hairy enough, that we wouldn't be justified in > some > > explicit backwards compatibility hackery in the spec. to remove it. > > > > For example, we could allow it to appear in parameter lists and provide a > > dynamic check to ensure that nothing (other than a real undefined) is > > passed. Similarly we could explicitly allow: > > var undefined; > > Actually, for very much the same effect, you could simply treat > 'undefined' as a (refutable) _pattern_ that is only matched by the > undefined value. No need to make special rules for var or parameters > then.
Folks, could we move the unrelated discussion to its own thread? This thread's original subject is rather getting lost here. -- T.J.
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
