Thank you so much.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com
wrote:
On Aug 9, 2015, at 2:34 PM, Yusuke SUZUKI wrote:
Hi forks,
Recently, we implemented Reflect.enumerate in WebKit JSC.
At that time, the question is raised When are the enumerated keys
in the active enumeration.?
And is the creation of the iterator by calling [[Enumerate]] included in
active enumeration?
[1]: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=147677
Best regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https
Method).
Best Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com
wrote:
On Jul 22, 2015, at 9:38 AM, Yusuke SUZUKI wrote:
Hi forks,
Seeing the ES6 specification, I've found that PropertyDefinitionEvaluation
for static MethodDefinition is missing.
For example
It turns out the spec is fine
https://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-weakmap.prototype.set
step 5 says
If Type
https://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-ecmascript-data-types-and-values
(*key*) is not Object, throw a *TypeError* exception.
as I hoped
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com wrote:
[+Allen]
Can registered Symbols be used as keys in WeakMaps? If so, we have a fatal
unauthorized communications channel that we need to fix in the spec asap!
Why do registered Symbols appear? (oops, maybe I missed
to be invented. You have added another tool to our toolbox. You have
deepened our understanding of what is possible.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Yusuke SUZUKI utatane@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Yusuke SUZUKI utatane@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks. And sorry
PM, Yusuke SUZUKI utatane@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi forks,
In ES6 spec, template site objects are strongly referenced by the
realm.[[templateMap]].
So naive implementation leaks memory because it keeps all the site
objects in the realm.
To lookup the identical template site objects, template
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Yusuke SUZUKI utatane@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks. And sorry for the late reply.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com
wrote:
Hi Yusuke, I am not sure I understood your message. Could you show some
example code that would
it if I misunderstood)
Best Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Thank you. I've filed it here[1]
[1]: https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4327
Best Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 3:45 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com
wrote:
On Apr 18, 2015, at 12:46 PM, Yusuke SUZUKI wrote:
Hi forks,
Seeing ES6
(because null is not
undefined).
And then reaching step 3.a,
Let searcher be GetMethod(regexp, @@search).
Then TypeError is thrown by GetV's ToObject.
Is it intentional behavior?
Best Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss
.
But if possible, I think it is preferable to change the spec to improve
performance of iteration for user provided iterators.
[1]: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=141351
Best regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Katelyn Gadd k...@luminance.org wrote:
I'm certainly
Oops, sorry, I've missed PropertyName : *BindingElement*.
So when using computed property name as PropertyName, shorthanded style
cannot be used.
Thank you
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Hi forks.
Seeing the latest rev 27 draft, PropertyName is defined in the 12.2.5,
PropertyName[Yield,GeneratorParameter] :
LiteralPropertyName
[+GeneratorParameter] ComputedPropertyName
[~GeneratorParameter] ComputedPropertyName[?Yield]
And BindingProperty in the ObjectBindingPattern
JavaScriptCore implements it correctly.
---
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de wrote:
(Hopefully not too off-topic for es-discuss.)
Are JavaScript engines correctly implementing the operation PutValue [1]?
I’d expect the following
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
Yusuke SUZUKI wrote:
Make sense. So microtasks won't be introduced yet, but Promises and
asynchronous execution semantics (enough for Promises) are introduced into
ES6. Is it correct?
And enough for modules
and the event loop. But I can't find details of
the event loop consensus. Is there any consensus about event loop
abstraction in ES6?
Thanks,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Alex Russell slightly...@google.com wrote:
Only that a suitable hook is needed that embedders can implement. Luckily
that's simple WRT existing semantics (we are oblivious to future turns at
the language level) and doesn't demand that we import the event loop
, V8, SpiderMonkey, JSC accepts this form and
recognize it as \x008.
To bridege the gap, I think it is better to introduce this form to the spec
officially.
---
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https
-23
But I couldn't find why it is dropped.
Probably I missed the discussion. So I'd appreciate it if you would
inform me about it.
---
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
combined with concise
methods that you get x+x[symbol](y)+y (note unary + :-P).
It's a rabbit-hole we'd rather avoid.
Agreed.
Thank you all for your replies clarifications!
---
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
interpretation. Thoughts?
{ Kevin }
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
wrote:
On Mar 8, 2013, at 2:35 , Yusuke SUZUKI wrote:
In Esprima and Acorn, because of performance issue, their identifier
identification functions require a code point as number, not string[2][3].
So I suggest accepting a code point number as an argument.
The functions I proposed accept
,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
GetValue(0, false, Uint32), and then totalOffset
is 0 and byteLength is 1, so a RangeError exception isn't thrown. But
because Uint32 requires 4 bytes, this access is out of range.
I think we should check (totalOffset + ElementSize) byteLength, right?
--
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
.
Allen
On Jan 3, 2013, at 5:49 AM, Yusuke Suzuki wrote:
Hello all,
According to rev13 draft section 15.13.7.4 step 4,
4. If totalOffset ≥ byteLength, throw a RangeError exception.
But this doesn't guarantee target in range of buffer.
For example,
var view = new DataView(new
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
yield undefined and
not empty.
Letting Return completions escape from functions was needed when we were
considering supporting block lambdas but isn't need now.
Allen
On Dec 3, 2012, at 11:23 PM, Yusuke Suzuki wrote:
Hello all,
Because of 8.3.19.1 step 17, [[Call]] returns result
= test(); // value is empty...
--
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
post
http://uupaa.hatenablog.com/entry/2012/07/02/113201 )
I think it is better to describe it as NOTE or standardize this behavior.
[1] Thu Dec 31 23:59:60 GMT 1998
[2] 2012-07-01T08:59:60Z
--
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es
Hello,
I've found the issue in mootools-core [1].
[1] https://github.com/mootools/mootools-core/issues/2402
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
, Array,
Object, Function].
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Ah, thanks. I've got it :)
On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Yusuke Suzuki utatane@gmail.comwrote:
Hello all,
In rev10 draft, TypeArray is described.
But why TypeArray instead of TypedArray? In WebGL's spec
I've pass through ES6 rev10 draft and found that DataView.prototype object
[[Class]] isn't DataView.
Why is it? I think allowing DataView(null, 0, 0) and using it as
DataView.prototype is better.
--
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es
constructor, and Class check(such as [[Class]] is
DataView) to internal property check(such as
object.[[HasProperty]](DataView)) ?
Probably because at least ArrayBuffer has no internal specialized method, I
think transforming to subclassable constructor is easy.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Sun, Sep 30, 2012
Mark S. Miller wrote:
Security aside, given maximin
class Foo
what do you suggest Foo.prototype be?
I suggest adding @@toStringTag:Foo property to Foo.prototype when `class
Foo` is executed.
___
es-discuss mailing list
Great! ES6 rev10 draft is very interesting, so I'm now reading this
changes...
And I've found typo in draft section 11.1.10, 11.1 StaticSemantics, ,
`IsValidSimpleAssignmentTarge` should be `IsValidSimpleAssignmentTarget`
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:15 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
And I've found typo in Map implementation.
15.14.1.1 MapInitialization, step 6, `internal method` should be `internal
property`
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:15 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.comwrote:
As usual, at
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id
Thanks, I've filed them.
https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=664
https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=665
https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=666
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012
Related issues are here.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=791343
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=791348
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=791352
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote:
Jason Orendorff
Hello Sukyoung,
3) Arguments Object
It is filed at https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=440 ;)
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2012-July/023888.html
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Sukyoung Ryu sukyoung@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
We found possible
/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-11.13
Static Semantics: Early Errors
Because example expression isn't Identifier, ArrayPattern or ObjectPattern,
so early Syntax Error should be raised.
If I missed something, please point out.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Joseph Spencer
:57 PM, Yusuke Suzuki utatane@gmail.comwrote:
Hello Joseph
A.3
UnaryExpression:
As written, it is suggested that the following is legal (which seems
illegal):
5;
++typeof++5;
I think it shoud raise ReferenceError (in ES5) or SyntaxError (in ES6)
in ES5
because of section 16
baseValue.[[Prototype]] for base of super reference.
If I missed something, I would appreciate it if you would inform me.
P.S.
This is 3rd mail I sent because 2 mails are blocked 12 hours ago. Sorry if
2 duplicate mails are delivered after this mail.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
that using baseValue.[[Prototype]] for base of super reference.
If I missed something, I would appreciate it if you would inform me.
P.S.
This is 4th mail I sent because 3 mails are blocked 12 hours ago. Sorry if
3 duplicate mails are delivered after this mail.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
) is basically blocked... What should I
do to pass the filter?
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
and max recursion limit
exceeded error is thrown.
So I suggest that using baseValue.[[Prototype]] for base of super reference.
If I missed something, I would appreciate it if you would inform me.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss
and max recursion limit
exceeded error is thrown.
So I suggest that using baseValue.[[Prototype]] for base of super reference.
If I missed something, I would appreciate it if you would inform me.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss
.
So I suggest that using baseValue.[[Prototype]] for base of super reference.
If I missed something, I would appreciate it if you would inform me.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org
advice.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
@gmail.com mailto:utatane@gmail.com), but all mails
were blocked (I tried to send it 10 times), so I cannot send it to
es-discuss from gmail. I send this mail from an alternative smtp server.
I would like to know how to pass the filter of es-discuss...
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:46 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.comwrote:
The specification of the Global Env. Record is obviously incomplete in the
current draft and there are some global scope design issues that remain to
be resolved. Hopefully, at the July TC39 meeting.
I'm looking
these that you have identified?
As long as I know, all cases have been already reported.
For example, old Array.from spec had the same problem.
But in the latest draft, [[Put]] 'length' is inserted, so this issue
doesn't occur.
https://gist.github.com/1074126
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
argumentsList and performing
Binding Initialisation with it, or delaying internal method override phase
of ao.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
method override phase
of ao.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
, they're reflected lately, so I thought they are
filtered.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
method override phase
of ao.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
]]:
true, [[Enumerable]]: false, [[Configurable]]: false}, and false.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Thanks for your clarification!
I filed this issue to bugs.ecmascript.org
https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 11:50 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.comwrote:
Yes, please file a bug report at bugs.ecmascript.org
As you suggest
Thanks for your reply.
I filed this issue to bugs.ecmascript.org
https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=415
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.comwrote:
this also should be reported to bugs.ecmascript.org
This is a very good
, [[Writable]] property is specified. But because they are
getter and setter, we should not specify [[Writable]] property, is it right?
If it is a issue, I'll file this to bugs.ecmascript.org.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss
Thanks, I filed this issue at
https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=387
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.comwrote:
could you file this as a bug at bugs.ecmascript.org
I want to make sure it isn't forgotten if nobody else
consider that [[Call]] result is Reference
and this feature makes big performance-regression, personally I think 3 is
better.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Thanks for your reply.
So I've filed the issue in https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=368
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.comwrote:
Yes, that is an issue. There are some others relating to formal parameter
initialization
, please point out.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Thanks for your quick reply!
Later, I'll file these test262 bugs to bugs.ecmascript.org.
PS.
Sorry, I forgot to add es-discuss to CC.
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 2:51 AM, Norbert Lindenberg
ecmascr...@norbertlindenberg.com wrote:
Suzuki-san,
Thank you for reporting
description about [[Prototype]] of
Intl.Collator.protoype like ES5 Array.prototype in section 15.4.4, like
The value of the [[Prototype]] internal property of the Intl.Collator
prototype object is the standard built-in Object prototype object (15.2.4).
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
Previously, I reported this issue to JSC, sent patch and accepted :-)
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71572
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Erik Arvidsson erik.arvids...@gmail.comwrote:
I should have read 15.10.4.1 as well. It clearly states that the
source property needs to be
Hello,
0xFFe2 is valid HexIntegerLiteral, because 'e' and '2' is one of the hex
digit.
So I think it is OK.
0xFFe2 // 65506
0xFFe3 // 65507
Thanks.
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Mathias Bynens math...@qiwi.be wrote:
The spec grammar for `HexIntegerLiteral` is as follows:
wrote:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Yusuke Suzuki utatane@gmail.com
wrote:
BTW, I thought that the example in
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:match_web_reality_spec
exec(/(?=a)+/, );
should return false. Is it right?
In ES5, it should be a syntax error. The positive
-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
On Oct 20, 2011, at 10:17 PM, Yusuke Suzuki wrote:
And, I tried to implement RegExp.prototype.compile, but ES5 and ES3
not defined its standard behavior and I thought compile method is
changing RegExp#source / #global / #ignoreCase / #multiline which
:command
If you find bugs, I would appreciate it if you would report it.
Thanks.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 3:54 AM, Juriy Zaytsev kan...@gmail.com wrote:
How does it fair on test262? http://test262.ecmascript.org/
--
kangax
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 6:26 AM, Yusuke Suzuki utatane@gmail.com
Hello.
I wrote new ECMA262 5.1 full support engine iv / lv5 in C++.
This is highly inspired from JSC, V8 and SpiderMonkey. (especially JSC)
https://github.com/Constellation/iv
This aims at most precise engine to ECMA262 5.1 specification. (like
the great engine,)
I read ECMA262 and wanted
I also reported it to es5-discuss
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es5-discuss/2010-December/003851.html,
and got This is a bug in the spec.
I think [[Put]](length, {[[Value]]: n}, true) step should be
inserted to the end of this(like, pop, push method), is it correct?
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at
78 matches
Mail list logo
