got it, thanks
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Domenic Denicola < [email protected]> wrote: > I think this thread is the most recent discussion of the issue: > > http://esdiscuss.org/topic/1944 > > ------------------------------ > *From:* [email protected] [[email protected]] > on behalf of Angus Croll [[email protected]] > *Sent:* Monday, March 11, 2013 17:08 > *To:* Rick Waldron > *Cc:* TC39; es-discuss > *Subject:* Re: Jan 30 TC39 Meeting Notes > > No I more-or-less agree with your spiel. > I'm unclear why the group considered let/const is an issue for sloppy mode. > > > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Angus Croll <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Thanks for this Rick. >>> >>> From the minutes, I'm not getting the rationale for banishing let/const >>> from sloppy mode. >>> >> >> >> Are you specifically asking about my "big spiel"? I stated that >> disallowing any new syntax (not just let/const) in non-strict mode would >> result in stunted adoption and "too many rules" confusion. Despite my >> belief that strict mode is the right mode, I also asserted that it's simply >> unrealistic to think that new syntax is a big enough carrot. >> >> Important to note that I'm not speaking for anyone that reads or >> participates on this list. >> >> Rick >> >> >> >> > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
