Honestly, I don’t think so — Colloquially, it’s just easier to deal with small indexes vs dates/years. They’re shorter, they don’t change as often (in theory). It’s a hard habit to break for most people.
> On Jun 1, 2016, at 10:09 AM, kdex <[email protected]> wrote: > > @caitlin Good find, but this directory name was presumably only given to > match the naming scheme of [1] and [2]. > Somebody should probably do the work and rename them all. > > @leo: The Chrome Platform Status page [3] also mentions "ES8". > > [1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/master/test/mjsunit/es6/ > [2] https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/master/test/mjsunit/es7 > [3] https://www.chromestatus.com/features/5644533144485888 > > On Mittwoch, 1. Juni 2016 10:01:18 CEST Caitlin Potter wrote: >> Oh sure you have, >> >> https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/master/test/mjsunit/es8/ >> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/master/test/mjsunit/es8/> for >> instance :p >> >>> On Jun 1, 2016, at 9:59 AM, Leo Balter <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I haven't seen anyone referring to ES2017 as ES8, so I imagine we won't >>> have this problem anymore in a couple years. In anyway, this is an addition >>> that won't happen to ES2016, it's too late for that. >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 9:36 AM, John Gardner <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> There is no such thing as ES7. >>> >>> You say that as though you can control how people index language versions >>> in their minds... >>> >>> On 1 June 2016 at 23:33, Mark S. Miller <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> ES2015 was the last version for which the short for ("ES6") was also in >>> common use. After that, there is only ES2016 etc. There is no such thing as >>> ES7. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:03 PM, John Gardner <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> I'd like to propose a simple yet potent syntax addition >>> <https://esdiscuss.org/topic/constructing-objects-from-named-identifiers> >>> for /ECMAScript\d+/. What's the most direct approach to get this officially >>> considered? I've seen differing procedures mentioned in places and I'm >>> unsure. >>> >>> BTW, am I the only one getting confused by the year-based naming >>> convention? I skip over intermediate letters when reading and only absorb >>> the last digit, which makes me mistake ES2017 as ES7, which is actually >>> ES2016, which I get mixed up with ES6, which is ES2015. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> es-discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>> <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Cheers, >>> --MarkM >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> es-discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>> <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> es-discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
