Le 20/02/2014 06:39, Brendan Eich a écrit :
Bradley Meck wrote:
If I am reading the spec right (and I may not be), only the generator
should fail? The first call to gen().next(value) must have value be
undefined, and the others do not check.
I thought we agreed at the January 28 meeting to
A while back, the wiki Harmony draft spec for iterators changed from a
Pythonic StopIteration approach to one where iterator objects return a
{value : iter-value, done : bool} object. It since seems to have changed
back. Is that the case, or am I misreading the situation?
It seems that Tracuer
What you're probably seeing is that the wiki no longer has up to date
information. As things have been fully fleshed out in the es6 draft spec, the
wiki is no longer up to date.
To answer your question, the iterator protocol hasn't changed back to using
StopIteration. It's still { value, done
Thanks. Btw, where is the final spec stored?
On Feb 20, 2014 3:53 AM, Brandon Benvie bben...@mozilla.com wrote:
What you're probably seeing is that the wiki no longer has up to date
information. As things have been fully fleshed out in the es6 draft spec,
the wiki is no longer up to date.
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 9:27 AM, joe joe...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks. Btw, where is the final spec stored?
You can find it in the Drafts page:
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:specification_drafts.
harmony:specification_drafts [ES Wiki]Draft Specification for ES.next
Hi,
This isn't really an es-discuss topic, as it is about performance of
implementations rather than the language itself.
On Wed 12 Feb 2014 18:08, Jelle van den Hooff je...@vandenhooff.name writes:
Do the delegating yield semantics allow a VM to transform nested
yield* calls into normal
Le 20/02/2014 15:03, Andy Wingo a écrit :
Hi,
This isn't really an es-discuss topic, as it is about performance of
implementations rather than the language itself.
Stating my own opinion only on behalf of myself: I think this thread
appropriate for es-discuss. How developers use the language
Consider
http://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-array.prototype.splice
step 10. It uses the phrasing if deleteCount is not present but I
can't find anything in the specification defining the concept of
present or not present. So it's hard for me to tell what behavior
this
On 2/20/14 12:09 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
Boris should file a bug.
Done. https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2559
Thanks,
Boris
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 2/20/14 11:16 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
Nope, it means that the length of the argument list is less than two,
hence an argument corresponding to 'deleteCount' was not passed.
OK. In that case, I think this term
On Feb 20, 2014, at 9:11 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 2/20/14 11:16 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
Nope, it means that the length of the argument list is less than two,
hence an argument corresponding to 'deleteCount' was not passed.
Would you prefer it to say If fewer than two arguments were
On 2/20/14 12:24 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
Would you prefer it to say If fewer than two arguments were passed, then let
deleteCount be ...?
That would be clearer, yes, if we want to stick to natural language
here. It avoids confusion about undefined == missing issues, for sure,
and
If Module objects are not classes, then what would be the recommended way
to detect if a given object is a Module?
Would there be a unique toString output?
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Object literals are already a great alternative to switch in JS:
var cases = {
val1: function () {},
val2: function () {}
};
cases[val]();
Fall through is more trouble than it's worth, IMO.
On Feb 17, 2014 1:44 PM, Giacomo Cau cau.giacomo...@tiscali.it wrote:
-Messaggio
On Feb 20, 2014, at 11:47 AM, Guy Bedford wrote:
If Module objects are not classes, then what would be the recommended way to
detect if a given object is a Module?
Would there be a unique toString output?
Can't. 'toString' might be a binding exported by a module so a module object
can
Thanks, if there is some way to detect this it may well be useful.
The use case I came across it was trying to allow ES6 modules to be
transpiled into AMD for use in an ES6 loader. I'm still not sure how
necessary the use case is, but it definitely would need this functionality
work.
On 20
On Feb 20, 2014, at 12:53 PM, Guy Bedford wrote:
Thanks, if there is some way to detect this it may well be useful.
The use case I came across it was trying to allow ES6 modules to be
transpiled into AMD for use in an ES6 loader. I'm still not sure how
necessary the use case is, but it
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.comwrote:
On Feb 20, 2014, at 12:53 PM, Guy Bedford wrote:
Thanks, if there is some way to detect this it may well be useful.
The use case I came across it was trying to allow ES6 modules to be
transpiled into AMD for
Thanks John for explaining. As for the usefulness of this path as I say it
is yet to be determined.
Specifically the ability to detect a module instance is needed to allow ES6
loaders to load AMD that was transpiled from ES6 into AMD.
It may be a little bit of an obscure use case, the exact
On 20 Feb 2014, at 21:20, Eric Elliott e...@ericleads.com wrote:
Object literals are already a great alternative to switch in JS:
var cases = {
val1: function () {},
val2: function () {}
};
cases[val]();
In that case, you’d need a `hasOwnProperty` check to make sure you’re not
20 matches
Mail list logo
