On Jul 10, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote: >>> Yes. Naively, I’d expect the result of a TemplateLiteral to be a string. >>> But I previously didn’t understand the difference between static semantics >>> and runtime semantics. The indirection makes things more difficult to >>> follow, but I assume it helps with writing the specification (given >>> proxies, generators etc.). >> >> Static semantics is about things about or which can be derived from just the >> source code, independent of the actual execution of the code >> Runtime semantics is about what actually happens when the program executes >> and typically has dependency upon the runtime state of the program. > > Yes. It’s quite clever how this attaches behavior to grammar rules (which > initially confused me – I’m more used to runtime semantics referring directly > to syntax). > > It seems to me that part of the challenge of writing and reading the spec is > that it has the complexity and structure of code, but without the support of > code-focused tools such as IDEs. In an IDE, I’d simply click on an identifier > to jump to its definition. Refactoring would also be simple(r).
Yup. Ideally the spec. would be a hyper document with built-in browsings tools. And by that I'm think of something much more elaborate than even the hyperlinks that JSON puts into the HTML versions. A general gripe of mine, even on the web and with html we are moistly emulating linear paper-oriented documents. Allen _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
