Andreas Rossberg <[email protected]> writes: > On 9 May 2013 14:58, Gareth Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> In general, I think the message I'm getting from you is that when it >> comes to for-in, a more permissive reading of the standard is likely to >> be more accurate. >> >> Does this seem fair? > > Yes, I would say so. Moreover, I wouldn't even assume that for-in > semantics is deterministic for any given VM -- it can change depending > on dynamic optimisations and representation changes.
Thanks, that's great. Our current candidate formalism does indeed allow for non-determinism :) G _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
