Herby Vojčík wrote:
We need to detail how Nil works, how it cannot be wrapped or observed,
etc. in order to maintain equivalence.
In my naive view, [[GetP]] returns Nil, [[SetP]] does nothing,
[[Call]] return Nil. But there are sure some nasty details down there.
Yeah, this is unsafe by design, if the spec has a bug then Nil leaks
out. Want undefined in ES6, not Nil.
I don't understand the unsafety. If Nil is observable part of the
language, then this is natural semantics. If it should be hidden,
that's another story.
I assumed from context (cited above) that you were talking about
destructruing in ES6. That spec lacks Nil as an observable and must
censor any internal Nil specification type. Could be done, but I argue
it's safer to leave [[GetP]] etc. dealing in undefined for now.
Of course if we want Nil in the language, then full speed ahead! That
would be later (ES7 or above), if ever.
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
