Re: Annex A of 5th Edition

2012-09-06 Thread Brendan Eich
The grammar you think might make more sense is clearly broken, it does not produce ++a[i] or x.y.z-- Why are you trying to change the grammar? /be Joseph Spencer wrote: It's an honor to get replies from you guys! I feel more educated now about the grammar, and the negative lookahead

System Module and/or Object???

2012-09-06 Thread Allen Wirfs-Brock
Do we have an active champion for such a module or global object? There is a strawman[1] that is pretty sketchy. There is also a proposal [2] for a @std modules that alias most of the built-ins with global names. Neither of them describe any new functionality that is only available through

Annex A of 5th Edition

2012-09-06 Thread Joseph Spencer
My apologies on that one. I meant to type the following: PostfixExpression: LeftHandSideExpression [no LineTerminator here] ++ LeftHandSideExpression [no LineTerminator here] -- PrefixExpression: ++ [no LineTerminator here] LeftHandSideExpression -- [no LineTerminator here]

Re: Annex A of 5th Edition

2012-09-06 Thread Allen Wirfs-Brock
On Sep 6, 2012, at 12:17 PM, Joseph Spencer wrote: My apologies on that one. I meant to type the following: PostfixExpression: LeftHandSideExpression [no LineTerminator here] ++ LeftHandSideExpression [no LineTerminator here] -- PrefixExpression: ++ [no LineTerminator

Re: Annex A of 5th Edition

2012-09-06 Thread Joe Spencer
Chrome appears to follow the spec a little closer. Observe the following: var someVar = 5; //valid syntax, throws ReferenceError function passPlease(){ alert(someVar); } //invalid syntax, throws SyntaxError function failPlease(){ alert(someVar); } -Joe Allen Wirfs-Brock

Re: Annex A of 5th Edition

2012-09-06 Thread Brendan Eich
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: On Sep 6, 2012, at 12:17 PM, Joseph Spencer wrote: My apologies on that one. I meant to type the following: PostfixExpression: LeftHandSideExpression [no LineTerminator here] ++ LeftHandSideExpression [no LineTerminator here] -- PrefixExpression: ++

Re: Annex A of 5th Edition

2012-09-06 Thread Brendan Eich
Joseph Spencer wrote: My apologies on that one. I meant to type the following: PostfixExpression: LeftHandSideExpression [no LineTerminator here] ++ LeftHandSideExpression [no LineTerminator here] -- PrefixExpression: ++ [no LineTerminator here] LeftHandSideExpression -- [no

Re: Annex A of 5th Edition

2012-09-06 Thread Allen Wirfs-Brock
On Sep 6, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: According to the specification, those all should produce runtime ReferenceError exceptions. However, at least Firefox, reports them as early syntax errors. Technically, that is out of conformance with the

Re: Annex A of 5th Edition

2012-09-06 Thread Joseph Spencer
Wow, thanks for the reference to clause 16 (c16). I'm having a blast getting further into the spec and it really helps to have these conversations about it! I believe its safe to say then that operating on c16 alone, FF handles the spec appropriately and Chrome probably gave too much heed to