First I'd like to state that I don't mean to suggest that this is
"simple", in practical terms, as either a spec change or in application of
the feature in day-to-day code.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Jason Orendorff <jason.orendo...@gmail.com
> I get that to you, that's all it is. But I have trouble seeing how that is
> true in any objective sense. In the spec
The point I was trying to make is that "to me" is exactly the perspective
understanding of the spec more often than not. In teaching people who spend
I get more questions about things that look like they should work some way
in one place because it actually works that way in another than anything
I don't seek to trivialize either side of the argument but with syntax in
particular I would hope that complexity additions be back-loaded into the
spec rather than front-loaded onto users.
I apologize FOR MY USE OF CAPS TO EXPRESS emphasis. It's a bad habit :P
- Matthew Robb
es-discuss mailing list