We intend to have both unique and private symbols. The only
difference between the two is that the latter are filtered from
certain reflective operations.
I have come to think that this distinction is backwards. It is
attributing something to symbols that actually is an attribute of
properties.
Le 07/02/2013 12:58, Andreas Rossberg a écrit :
We intend to have both unique and private symbols. The only
difference between the two is that the latter are filtered from
certain reflective operations.
I have come to think that this distinction is backwards. It is
attributing something to
I think prefix ? is easier from a reading point of view, but I'm not
really married to either.
Agreed, and I posted mainly to try to get to consensus. Prefix-? looks
like it is in the lead.
I think for the case of a long pattern with the ? outside the {}s, a prefix
? is easier to read.
On 7 February 2013 13:23, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 07/02/2013 12:58, Andreas Rossberg a écrit :
We intend to have both unique and private symbols. The only
difference between the two is that the latter are filtered from
certain reflective operations.
I have come to think
Wrt. the 13.2.1_1.js. It seems that Chrome doesn't pass undefined to the
toLocaleString from .call method, but you get Window instead (or whatever
global this is), so the function never fails (in my case).
I think implementations are free to pass non-undefined in .call if the
object value is
Le 07/02/2013 17:25, Rick Waldron a écrit :
## __proto__.
YK: We just need compatibility
LH: We need to just suck it up and standardize
:-)
YK/BE: Discussion re: interop with current implementations.
BE: (Review of latest changes to __proto__ in Firefox)
EA: Matches Safari
BE: __proto__
They aren't free to decide: If the callee is in strict mode, it has to receive
what the caller provided; if it's non-strict, then undefined and null are
replaced by the global object (ES5.1, 10.4.3). But the global object isn't a
number either...
Norbert
On Feb 7, 2013, at 8:55 , Nebojša
On 7 February 2013 18:09, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Speaking of proxies, what should happen in the following case (setter and
proxy from same realm):
var protoSetter = Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(Object.prototype,
'__proto__').set
var p = new Proxy({}, handler);
Le 07/02/2013 18:22, Andreas Rossberg a écrit :
On 7 February 2013 18:09, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Speaking of proxies, what should happen in the following case (setter and
proxy from same realm):
var protoSetter = Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(Object.prototype,
'__proto__').set
Re: Maps and Sets comparators:
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote:
# January 30 2013 Meeting Notes
(snip)
ARB: if we have a forth form of equality as default, we should be
honest, name it, and make it available separately
YK: Can we use === and
On 7 February 2013 18:36, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 07/02/2013 18:22, Andreas Rossberg a écrit :
On 7 February 2013 18:09, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Speaking of proxies, what should happen in the following case (setter and
proxy from same realm):
var protoSetter
I am hesitant to call this maximally minimal because the driving force
behind coming up with this varies significantly from what drove maximally
minimal classes. The driving force for this is the realization that the
module system is perceived as being not close enough to being finished for
ES6,
On Feb 7, 2013, at 9:09 AM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 07/02/2013 17:25, Rick Waldron a écrit :
## __proto__.
Discussion re: MOP semantics with __proto__
BE: Proxy has to stratify the MOP.
Speaking of proxies, what should happen in the following case (setter and
proxy
On Feb 7, 2013, at 9:48 AM, Brandon Benvie bran...@brandonbenvie.com wrote:
The goal here is not to claim that all is lost with the module system in
full, because I do think that's not a certainty yet. I do think it is a
likely enough outcome that there should be a fallback to capture the
I just want to clarify that what I've proposed is not any semantics that
aren't in the module system. It's a prioritization of what pieces of the
module system are important above the others. If the prioritization isn't
needed, which I recognize it may not be, then what I said can safely be
There has been a great deal of pressure from users wanting details
about whether the modules spec will cover their use cases, from
module library authors wanting to determine whether their most
important features will be covered (so that they can retire their
systems), and -more recently- from
The functions defined within the Ecma standards aren't specified using
ECMAScript code so they aren't really either strict or non-strict. However, all
the standard ES5 methods are specified assuming that the function gets what was
actually passed. A standard method should never directly or
On Feb 7, 2013, at 9:41 AM, Joshua Bell wrote:
Re: Maps and Sets comparators:
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote:
# January 30 2013 Meeting Notes
(snip)
**Conclusion/Resolution**
- `Map( iterator = undefined, comparator = undefined )`
-
On Feb 7, 2013, at 3:58 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
We intend to have both unique and private symbols. The only
difference between the two is that the latter are filtered from
certain reflective operations.
I have come to think that this distinction is backwards. It is
attributing
Thanks, but let's not jump to any conclusions. I'm the champion of modules
and wasn't even able to be a part of the discussion for family reasons. We
can't make any judgment about the status of modules, or plans for reacting
to the status of modules, before I've had a chance to be a part of
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Kevin Smith khs4...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, but let's not jump to any conclusions. I'm the champion of modules
and wasn't even able to be a part of the discussion for family reasons. We
can't make any judgment about the status of modules, or plans for reacting
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Claus Reinke claus.rei...@talk21.com wrote:
There are some existing ES.next modules shims/transpilers that
could be used as a starting point.
Here is an experiment I did with a JS module syntax that allowed for a
static compile time hooks for things like macros,
22 matches
Mail list logo
