> Le 9 oct. 2013 à 18:46, Oliver Hunt <[email protected]> a écrit : > > >> On Oct 9, 2013, at 1:35 AM, Claude Pache <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> Le 8 oct. 2013 à 23:43, Andrew Fedoniouk <[email protected]> a >>> écrit : >>> >>> Quite often Date values are used in data exchanges in form of JS >>> literals or JSON. >>> >>> It would be beneficial if JS (and JSON as derivative) will have an >>> ability to represent dates literally . For example: >> >> Even if there had been a dedicated syntax to write literal dates in JS, it >> doesn't mean that JSON would have allowed such a representation. >> For instance, the following entities have literal representation in JS, but >> do not exist in JSON, by the will of its designer: Infinity, NaN, and >> regular expressions. > > Infinity and NaN a identifiers referencing properties on the global object — > they’re not literals (nor is undefined). > > These are all valid (but you shouldn’t do it): > > function f(undefined, NaN, Infinity) { > // dooooooommmmmm > } > > > function f() { > var undefined = null /* fix that silly null vs. undefined shenanigans */, NaN > = Math.sqrt(2) /* make sure nan is not rational */, Infinity = 10000000 /* > this should be big enough */ > } > > —Oliver
Yes, I know... Well, the next time, I will avoid to do an oversimplification in order to make my point, for there is always someone for splitting hairs. (Hopefully, RegExp literals remain. And I left as an exercise to the reader to understand what happens to -0 when transiting through JSON, and why... No, I won't discuss the answer.) —Claude _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
