Don't get me wrong - I love most of the new features (some others I'm just indifferent too). But I'm not implementing the interpreter; I would be a user of it. My concern is that of the implementator's burden, and from my point of view, if it takes a long time to implement ES4, it'll be a long time before I can get to use ES4 in practice. What Michael O'Brien just posted sounds very promising though.
I haven't had the time to look at the whole spec as a whole, and since the spec is rather disorganized atm with a bunch of proposals, I'd have a hard time doing that in any case. But what I've seen so far is pretty good. I do kind of feel that there is some redundancy, i.e. there are distinct features that seem to overlap a lot. For example, packages and namespaces are both used to make programs more modular, albeit in different ways. Likewise for program units and packages. But like I said, I don't have a clear view of the spec as a whole, so I'll wait until there are good prose sections describing the usage of features before coming to a conclusion. -Yuh-Ruey Chen Garrett Smith wrote: > On 10/21/07, Yuh-Ruey Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey all, > > > > I've been watching ES4 development and occasionally contributing input, > > and I have noticed a somewhat disturbing trend. ES4 is getting ever more > > and more complex. > > > > I understand ES4 is a multi-paradigm language and so must be packed with > > features, but I don't think we want a repeat of the C++ template problem > > (where it took nearly a decade just to get most compilers near > > compliance with the C++ spec). My point is that although a significant > > update to ES is needed, if it takes too long to implement a conforming > > compiler/interpreter for it, the adoption of new features is going to be > > slow. Heck, I wonder how willing MS would be to provide a fully (or near > > enough to it) conforming interpreter for ES4 if the spec is so large. > > > Tamarin will be included as a plugin for IE. > > > Small proposals like bug fixes and reformed with and company, or > > proposals that generalize syntax to make the language more elegant are > > perfectly fine by me. But we already have such huge features like > > classes, generators, namespaces, type system, and now generic functions. > > Perhaps we should start deferring more features to ES5? > > > Which features do you feel are unjustified? Can you bring a specific issue? > > _______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
