I think we're confusing two different cases here:
1) usage of `await` in the body of a function that is not itself marked as
`async`
2) usage of `await f()` where `f` is not marked as `async`.
1 is easy to mark as an early error (and should be imo). 2, not so much
(and is what Mark was asking?)
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com
wrote:
This is the end of my assumed inverted WC design and why I assert that a
clear method is incompatible with it.
Couldn't this be solved by adding a little state (a monotonically
increasing 'generation' counter)
, this.[[WCIdentity]]);
if (!slot)
slot = CreateWCSlot(k, this.[[WCIdentity]]);
slot.value = v;
};
WC.prototype.get = function(k) {
var slot = GetWCSlot(k, this.[[WCIdentity]]);
return slot slot.value;
};
```
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Chris Toshok tos...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Calvin Metcalf calvin.metc...@gmail.com
wrote:
With this idea you cannot look at the import statement to see if the
imported binding is a module instance object or not.
the flip side of that is that you don't need to know whether something is
a default
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Erik Arvidsson erik.arvids...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Calvin Metcalf calvin.metc...@gmail.com
wrote:
One other option could be for import name from 'path' to resolve to the
module body there is no default export, thanks to the
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Matthew Robb matthewwr...@gmail.com
wrote:
What if the `import module/id;` form was an expression that evaluated to
the module instance object.
This means everything stays as it is now except we remove the ModuleImport
form and if you want to use the module
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Erik Arvidsson erik.arvids...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Chris Toshok tos...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Erik Arvidsson erik.arvids...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Calvin Metcalf
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Brian Di Palma off...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there anything preventing the addition of a ModuleImport like
affordance at a later stage (e.g. ES7)?
ModuleImport is the only way (in syntax) to achieve CommonJS `require`
behavior on the consumer-side when a module
Pirouette also has many exports per module for its bindings:
E.g.
https://github.com/toshok/pirouette/blob/master/bindings/uikit.js.
I use both import-{}-from (with many imported bindings) and module-from forms,
tending toward the former in framework code and the latter in application code.
9, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Chris Toshok tos...@gmail.com wrote:
Pirouette also has many exports per module for its bindings:
E.g.
https://github.com/toshok/pirouette/blob/master/bindings/uikit.js.
I use both import-{}-from (with many imported bindings) and module-from
forms, tending toward
10 matches
Mail list logo
