Rick, that big bold thing is what mislead to me ... *This proposal* I thought was referred to the page, the one showed in that page ...
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Andrea Giammarchi < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> yes, I should have checked the specs but that page should be either >> updated or removed. >> > > No, you should just read the spec and if you find yourself at the page you > linked to, in big bold letters at the top: > > *This proposal has progressed to the Draft ECMAScript 6 Specification, > which is available for review here: > specification_drafts<http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:specification_drafts>. > Any new issues relating to them should be filed as bugs at > http://bugs.ecmascript.org* > > > >> Anyway you still didn't convince me generators were needed at all there, >> neither that I can "simply shim iterators" 'cause this makes generators >> pointless in first place if it was so easy to polyfill ... which is not. >> >> The polyfill gonna grow in size for no concrete reason now, can I at >> least ask if current specs about Maps, Sets, and WeakMaps are final? >> > > Polyfills don't decide the fate of the future. > > > Rick > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
