Brendan Eich wrote: > Herby Vojčík wrote: > > Now I am confused. > > For (p.q?).r to be same as p.q?.r, (p.q?) must return reified Nil, not > > undefined. I was at the impression you say "Nil at the background, but > > whenever it becomes observable, it should be changed to undefined". > > That means p.q? returns undefined, and (p.q?).r fails. > > Obviously I don't want these different parenthesizations to fail. I > believe we can spec the semantics such that InternalNil, just like > ES1-6's Reference type, is not observable.
What happens in more complicated expressions? let foo, bar = (foo = p.q?).r; It would be strange to me if `foo === undefined && bar === undefined`. Herby's proposal that `foo === nil && bar === nil` makes more sense. I think it would be expected for `bar = (foo = p.q?).r` to result in the same value for bar as `bar = (p.q?).r`. Nathan _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
