I decided to do so myself: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/968#issuecomment-320531527
I've been largely absent from this conversation because I would've found myself countering about 2/3 of the stuff in this thread (not just from Dmitrii), and the two TC39 members that've been significantly active in this thread didn't really do a great job explaining why he was wrong. (mostly missing context) PSA for others: As for the incivility, please keep that crap off this list. I'm not pointing any fingers (unlike others), but please, keep this list respectful and mature. ----- Isiah Meadows m...@isiahmeadows.com Looking for web consulting? Or a new website? Send me an email and we can get started. www.isiahmeadows.com On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Andrei Neculau <andrei.necu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi! > > This thread obviously hides both lots of almost-esotheric thought process, > sometimes caught in remote discussions, and lots of emotions (and lots of > blockquoted text - it helps readability immensely if you turn that off > Dmitrii and not rely on mail/mailing-list clients to collapse it, thanks!). > > If we put emotions aside, could someone just take 15-30 minutes and > coherently dismantle Dmitrii's arguments? I believe he would like nothing > more than to understand if andwhy his basis is dead-wrong and to understand > the constraints that have lead us here, and the benefits that arise from > import.meta new.target import import() etc design. > > As it stands now, this thread reads more in favour of Dmitrii's logic to the > naked eye, albeit with no winner except status-quo, and I fear that has to > do partially with the fact that Dmitrii's replies have come with an > abundance of context and references, while most of the feedback that he got > was surgical in precision - pick something he said, give one argument > against it, to which he provides a seemingly logical and well built counter > argument, and the story repeats itself in multiple directions in parallel. > > So once again - can someone take Dmitrii's main points and suggestions (e.g. > Introspect, System, Module), which I think he summarized in this github > issue https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/968and just take them apart one > by one, highlighting how his logic is either lacking context (e.g. you says > apples and pears are different, when in fact the committee had this > discussion last year and decided they will both be fruits) or is simply > lacking soundness (e.g. you compare apples and pears, when in fact there's a > subtle difference that may be hidden to the unfamiliar eye) ? > > The community as a whole will thank you, no matter if as an individuals we > may align or not. > > Thank you advance, > Andrei > > PS: Disclaimer: I may be biased because I know Dmitrii in person, so I might > be better at seeing past his apparently-harsh language and reading between > his lines, but that doesn't stop me from having an untainted drive to digest > argumentation logic and to understand what took the JavaScript language in > what direction or another in general, and even more so on specific topics > which are usually easier to grasp. I believe generations to come will > benefit from such end-to-end argumentations in ways that we cannot even > comprehend now. > > PPS: I have been in the JavaScript world since the 6th grade, sometime in > 1997, so no need to go easy on me. Those generations to come will be even > more knowledged and critical than me, or us all put together, so lay it all > out there without mercy. Shut Dmitrii up in one single post, with arguments > that he cannot possibly counter. > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
