This is a judgment call, I'm with Jason, I think we should revisit. I'm
putting it on the TC39 meeting agenda.
/be
Allen Wirfs-Brock <mailto:[email protected]>
January 15, 2014 11:26 AM
So we discussed all that when we made that decision. I understand that
you disagree but is there any new data that should cause us to reopen
an issue that was already discussed and decided at a TC39 meeting?
Allen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Jason Orendorff <mailto:[email protected]>
January 15, 2014 11:18 AM
ES6 adds a clz function, but it's a method of Number.prototype.clz
rather than Math.clz.
The rationale for this decision is here (search for clz in the page):
http://esdiscuss.org/notes/2013-07-25
Can we reverse this, for users' sake? The pattern in ES1-5 is quite
strong: math functions go on the Math object.
The rationale (What if we add a uint64 type?) doesn't seem compelling
enough to justify the weirdness of the result: we'll have a single
mathematical operation available only as a Number method, and all
others available only as Math functions.
-j
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
