It's all in the specification draft.
http://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-11.1.5
http://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-13.3
In general, read the spec. draft not the wiki pages which are neither complete,
accurate, or normative.
allen
On Apr 2, 2013, at 10:21 AM, Brandon Benvie wrote:
> Is there any collected reference to what's been accepted from Object Literal
> Extensions [1]? There's definitely out of date stuff on there and I'm not
> sure what things have been formally accepted (with consensus) for ES6, which
> are generally assumed to be accepted for ES6, and which are definitely not
> going to be for ES6. For example, object literal property shorthands (method)
> seem like something that's generally accepted to be in ES6 (people often use
> it in example code here on es-discuss) but I can't find a reference to where
> it was actually agreed upon.
>
> Another related thing that's not at that page but is related is shorthand
> object initializers, like `var a = 5, b = 10, x = { a, b }` which I only see
> mentioned under the issues in [2]. This seems like an easy feature for ES6
> but I can't find any formal discussion of it.
>
> The reason I ask is because I don't see bugs related to implementing any of
> these features for either V8 or SpiderMonkey which leaves me wondering what
> is intended to be in ES6.
>
> [1] http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:object_literals
> [2] http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:destructuring
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
