On 10 August 2012 05:48, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > Luke Hoban wrote: >> Current Chrome builds appear to follow this approach, reporting that >> the 'let' in the initial code sample above appears in an 'unprotected >> statement context'. > > Are we all trying to follow the draft spec, or not? Thanks for proposing to > change it first. Implementations deviating without talking first = > disharmony.
To be fair, IIRC we implemented that before there was much of a spec covering details like that. So we picked what we thought makes most sense (and is most conservative). Having said that, I fully agree with Luke. The switch statement is what it is, unfortunately, and beyond repair, but to maintain scoping sanity, we should rule out examples that mistake its body for a proper block. There is precedent for that in C++, where you cannot place non-trivial declarations into a switch block either. /Andreas _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
