I think you've misunderstood. There's nothing in my New Year's email about
getting ES6 semantics when you find an occurrence of a particular feature
(that kind of thing was just a side conversation in the mega-thread, and a
very ill-conceived one IMO). The proposal is that within the
Grant Husbands
January 16, 2012
5:33 PM
Brendan Eich wrote:
2. Variation on empty label: support "do" as a reserved-identifier label
do: arr.forEach {|o|
if (...) break;
...
}
This seems like a sound way of doing it, indeed (I omitted your first
one because I prefer
Le 17/01/2012 01:46, Kris Kowal a écrit :
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Andrea Giammarchi
andrea.giammar...@gmail.com wrote:
then the method should be called getOrSetIfNotThere(obj, def) 'cause get()
would mislead too much
I’ve been calling this method getset for about three years, hoping
1. module = ES6 – some changes break with ES5.strict
some changes break with ES5.strict is confusing -- do you mean 'let' works
instead of being a future reserved word, whereas in (3, below) 'let' is not
reserved at all?
I’m not sure about specifics, I mean “ES6 things that are not
Le 17/01/2012 01:53, Kris Kowal a écrit :
For what it’s worth, Python dictionaries have .get(key, default) and
.setdefault(key, default). The former is non-mutating. Its behavior
is also different depending on arguments length. If the default is
not passed, it will throw an exception. If a
But in practice, strict mode can fade away as a transitional concept from ES5
that, while still spec'ed and implemented, doesn't get used much in practice.
Modules carry the torch of ES5-strict and take it even further, and become
the actual mode that gets used in practice, both because it
To complete the Smalltalk homage we would want this [the label do:] in
expressions, and we'd also want do: to take a block-lambda directly, in
addition to a CallWithBlockArguments.
Minor possibility of future-hostility: Should real keyword arguments ever make
it to ECMAScript, labels such
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de wrote:
Nitpick
- None of the above = ES3 semantics
That should be ES5 (non-strict) semantics. There are (a few)
incompatible changes between ES3 and ES5, and you don't want to
reintroduce the ES3 behavior (e.g., RegExp literal
But in practice, strict mode can fade away as a transitional concept from ES5
that, while still spec'ed and implemented, doesn't get used much in practice.
Modules carry the torch of ES5-strict and take it even further, and become
the actual mode that gets used in practice, both because it
Andrea Giammarchi-2 wrote:
You are underlying my points too .. I am dealing on daily basis with
highly
dependent little modules and the build procedure takes care of packing
everything together before deployment.
However, we are using a synchronous version of require, similar to the one
rauschma wrote:
@Andrea, Mariusz: Are you aware of the RequireJS optimizer [1]? It can be
used together with almond [2], an AMD loader with minimal footprint.
[1] http://requirejs.org/docs/optimization.html
[2] https://github.com/jrburke/almond
@Axel I read about it before, when we
Brendan Eich wrote:
Clearly(!) a set-if-not-present method should not be misnamed get.
I like the optional sentinel-meaning-not-found for get, and setDefault
per Python as Tab pointed out. Agree they should not be merged into one
API. Bikeshedding setDefault at leisure (in background in my head
Norbert Lindenberg wrote:
Nothing planned at this point. Unicode normalization would be a
natural candidate for the Globalization API, but it's not in scope
for version 1. Support for Unicode character properties probably
Maybe it could be added?
should be part of regular expressions, as
On 16 January 2012 23:18, David Herman dher...@mozilla.com wrote:
The goal that is missing, and what I believe is the single most important
part of my New Year's email, is:
9. Allow programmers to continue thinking of JS as a single cohesive language.
This is a relative concept rather than
On 17 January 2012 03:12, David Herman dher...@mozilla.com wrote:
The only way to avoid refactoring pitfalls entirely is to avoid making any
changes in the language altogether.
I disagree, see my previous reply. It depends on what class of
refactoring pitfalls you are talking about.
I
Andreas Rossberg wrote:
On 16 January 2012 23:18, David Hermandher...@mozilla.com wrote:
The goal that is missing, and what I believe is the single most
important part of my New Year's email, is:
9. Allow programmers to continue thinking of JS as a single
cohesive language.
This is a
So I'd have to write
use version 6;
module {...}
instead of just
module {...}
even though there's no backward compatibility issue? That's just mean! :-|
Why? Assuming that modules work out, they will be in ES7,8,.. as well.
So, 'module' isn't sufficient to identify ES6. At best,
I think mode terminology is quite misleading, particularly in regard to run
time semantics. For Es5 (and I believ es6) there is no need of for a global
runtime mode bit that is analagous to a cpu mode bit that ambiently changes the
semantics of some or all instruction. Instead, we have
Most of the extended code early errors I list in a previous message on this
thread are examples of changes that are not backward compatable with Es5 strict
code that Axel is talking about belowAxel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de
wrote:Ss1. module = ES6 – some changes break with ES5.strict
some
I think that requiring a user load a parser to handle XML is perfectly
fine. That's the state of the art in most programming languages.
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 09:51, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 16/01/2012 18:30, Nuno Job a écrit :
Hi guys,
I would like to make the case for
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Mariusz Nowak
medikoo+mozilla@medikoo.com wrote:
James Burke-5 wrote:
This is provably false. You normally do not need hundreds of modules
to build a site.
I wasn't theorizing, I was talking about real applications that are already
produced.
What I was
An updated draft is available at the usual place
(http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:specification_drafts )
That draft incorporated decisions made at the Nov. 2011 TC39 meeting. However,
note that this draft also contains a significant amount of still in flight
work.
On 16 January 2012 14:20, Andrea Giammarchi andrea.giammar...@gmail.comwrote:
var module = require(module);
is totally fine but
require(module, function (module) {
// is totally fine too
});
latter could be synchronous in node.js and asynchronous in the web, who
cares, as long as it
...but test262 finally
standshttps://bugs.ecmascript.org/buglist.cgi?product=Test262component=Testsresolution=---list_id=777
at zero (known) invalid test cases as of an hour ago!
Changeshttp://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=test262:test_case_format
contributed by Mark Miller last year
David Bruant wrote:
Have a look at quasis [1]. It provides what I'd consider to be a more
generic and safer solution to E4X.
E4X is more than just data production, though. It added a number of
accessors/syntax for handling XML elements, many of which can be the
LHS of an assignment:
expr..ident
If you desperately need it, you should be able to make a library for it,
and then if you need the extra syntax, add an extra compile step - like
what coffeescript does. After all, e4x is just an extension to JS, it
should be possible to add the data types natively and then make any e4x
code work
On Jan 17, 2012, at 3:45 AM, Herby Vojčík wrote:
Brendan Eich wrote:
Clearly(!) a set-if-not-present method should not be misnamed get.
I like the optional sentinel-meaning-not-found for get, and setDefault
per Python as Tab pointed out. Agree they should not be merged into one
API.
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
do: arr.alternate ({|o| if (...) continue; if (...) break; ...}, {|o| if
(...) continue; ...});
I don't see how this can support the most likely intended semantics
I think others might have better answers, but it seems that the
meaning of 'break' is to stop the whole
On Jan 16, 2012, at 7:45 PM, Norbert Lindenberg wrote:
On Dec 8, 2011, at 10:25 , Nebojša Ćirić wrote:
Proposed changes to the original API:
[snip]
2a. What happens with toLocaleString methods when user doesn't load
@globalization module?
I think they should work as specified in the
On 17 January 2012 13:05, Russell Leggett russell.legg...@gmail.com wrote:
After all, e4x is just an extension to JS, it should be possible to add
the data types natively and then make any e4x code work as syntactic sugar,
which you can desugar yourself.
I don't really know the details, but
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Jan 17, 2012, at 3:45 AM, Herby Vojčík wrote:
Brendan Eich wrote:
Clearly(!) a set-if-not-present method should not be misnamed
get.
I like the optional sentinel-meaning-not-found for get, and
setDefault per Python as Tab pointed out. Agree they should not
be
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Grant Husbands esdisc...@grant.x43.netwrote:
Russell Leggett wrote:
If you desperately need it, you should be able to make a library for it,
and
then if you need the extra syntax, add an extra compile step
I was simply making sure everyone was on the same
Andreas Rossberg
January 17, 2012
4:49 AM
On 16 January 2012 19:35, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote:
new ES6 features to classic
mode, as has been proposed by several people, clearly works against
(3),
I object. 3 is misstated to assume "switching" means
More material:
http://calculist.org/blog/2011/12/14/why-coroutines-wont-work-on-the-web/
On Jan 17, 2012, at 21:30 , Dean Landolt wrote:
You can get these semantics with generators plus a library (see Dave Herman's
task.js [1] as a great example). As generators your `return function;`
Le 17/01/2012 21:38, Axel Rauschmayer a écrit :
More
material:
http://calculist.org/blog/2011/12/14/why-coroutines-wont-work-on-the-web/
... and a link to the proposal:
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:generators
;-)
David
___
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Jussi Kalliokoski
jussi.kallioko...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, I was aware of the coroutines in generators, that's why I said it
would be sort of sugar. :)
But it's not sugar, it's a different feature. It's the difference between
shallow and deep continuations.
Okay, now that I've been re-reading how generators work and about task.js,
it has made me realize my error. Yes, you're right, what I've made is
actually deep continuations, and that's not really what I had in mind.
Thanks everyone, I'll try to think of a better way to do this (or to find
out if
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
An updated draft is available at the usual place
(http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:specification_drafts )
That draft incorporated decisions made at the Nov. 2011 TC39 meeting.
However, note that this draft also contains a significant amount of
still in
Axel Rauschmayer
January 17, 2012
1:04 AM
Minor
possibility of future-hostility: Should real keyword arguments ever
make it to ECMAScript, labels such as "do:" seem an obvious choice.
No, JS doesn't allow reserved identifiers to be used as parameter names
in any case.
Grant Husbands
January 17, 2012
10:14 AM
I think others
might have better answers, but it seems that themeaning of 'break'
is to stop the whole statement, and the meaning of'continue' is to
skip the inner block and hence return toarr.alternate
That's what I was
In order to get version 1 of the Globalization API done and into the hands of
users, we're no longer considering new functionality for this version. On the
other hand, string comparison (collation) is already included in this version,
and the sensitivity option lets you choose whether it should
On Jan 17, 2012, at 10:14 AM, Grant Husbands wrote:
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
do: arr.alternate ({|o| if (...) continue; if (...) break; ...}, {|o| if
(...) continue; ...});
I don't see how this can support the most likely intended semantics
I think others might have better answers, but
Somebody may be interested into ES6 Map, WeakMap, and Set
Here my attempt with all explanations:
https://github.com/WebReflection/es6-collections
The code must work in every browser/JS engine, reasons about weakness
choice listed too.
Now you know, feedbacks welcome
br
43 matches
Mail list logo
