Re: IteratorClose on spread expression
Le 23 juin 2015 à 14:58, Gary Guo nbdd0...@hotmail.com a écrit : To me it seems that spread expression will not call IteratorClose (neither in ArrayLiteral nor in Argument List), but IteratorClose is called in other places in the spec where iterators are used, ex. for-of, destructuring, builtin functions). Is this intended or this is a bug in the spec? Gary Guo In spread expressions for instance, the iterator is supposed to close itself, either when it is exhausted or when it throws an exception. But in some places, like for/of loops or destructuring assignments, an abrupt completion may come from an other source than the iterator being traversed; in which case (and only in that case) the iterator is explicitly closed. —Claude___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
IteratorClose on spread expression
To me it seems that spread expression will not call IteratorClose (neither in ArrayLiteral nor in Argument List), but IteratorClose is called in other places in the spec where iterators are used, ex. for-of, destructuring, builtin functions). Is this intended or this is a bug in the spec? Gary Guo ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Re: Pick operator
Le 20 juin 2015 à 06:30, Bob Myers r...@gol.com a écrit :
In the spirit of the discussion about language complexity and extensibility,
consider the following brain-addled, pre-strawman proposal for a new pick
operator.
http://rtm.github.io/boberator.html http://rtm.github.io/boberator.html
I'm just wondering whether reversing the order of the object and their keys is
a good choice. Contrary to destructuring assignment, there is no need to put a
target at the left hand side of an assignment operator.
```js
o.{ p, q: r } // { p: o.p, r: o.q }
```
Incidentally, it could help to keep strict left-to-right evaluation order
(which is an issue for destructuring assignment, IIRC).
—Claude___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Re: Move es-discuss to discuss.webplatform.org?
If not, does Discourse support email as a first-class subscription mechanism? That (plus mute) might help. I haven't used discourse a ton, but according to the features page: http://www.discourse.org/about/ They support email notifications and replies, as well as an opt in mailing list mode: Opt into a special mode where all messages are sent to you via email, exactly like a mailing list. Start new topics via email. - Russ ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Re: Move es-discuss to discuss.webplatform.org?
Yup the ability to subscribe to categories, ignore users and mute threads. Along with the ability to set digest periods. Here are all the options I get in preferences: Along with the ability to mute each thread too. On 23 June 2015 at 02:17, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote: Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: On Jun 22, 2015, at 12:51 PM, C. Scott Ananian ecmascr...@cscott.net mailto:ecmascr...@cscott.net wrote: It's not too surprising: it's the same reason why the ES6 spec was just published *on paper*, with the html version being explicitly flagged as non-normative. Actually the above is not correct. Both the HTML and PDF renderings are generated from the same normative source document. Both rendering are considered normative by Ecma International. What the HtML version http://ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0/ says is: The PDF version is the definitive specification. Any discrepancies between this HTML rendering and the PDF rendering are unintentional. That text is there be make it clear how disputes should be resolved in anybody thinks the two rendering disagree on any point. They don’, but just in case somebody wants to start a fight we have predetermined the outcome. I guess C. Scott's point is more about email being decades older than Discourse (or other server-side/proprietary discussion software). OTOH I know people (dherman, cough) who can't hack the email load of es-discuss, and do not like the well-known email tendency to have threads run off the rails into endless digression and argumentation. But Arv's point about gmail mute feature is good. I think any competent email reader should have that. If not, does Discourse support email as a first-class subscription mechanism? That (plus mute) might help. /be ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Re: Move es-discuss to discuss.webplatform.org?
Jonathan Kingston wrote: (I don't think any such es-discuss replacement should be on webplatform.org http://webplatform.org/, FWIW -- that crosses the W3C and Ecma streams.) Is that such an issue? I was thinking the larger exposure and closer working would be a bigger benefit than the mail management options. Different standard bodies, different IPR and other rules, different histories. That's enough for me to want a separate Discourse instance. Maybe it could be hosted on esdiscuss.org. /be ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Re: Move es-discuss to discuss.webplatform.org?
On Jun 23, 2015, at 1:24 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote: Jonathan Kingston wrote: (I don't think any such es-discuss replacement should be on webplatform.org http://webplatform.org/, FWIW -- that crosses the W3C and Ecma streams.) Is that such an issue? I was thinking the larger exposure and closer working would be a bigger benefit than the mail management options. Different standard bodies, different IPR and other rules, different histories. That's enough for me to want a separate Discourse instance. Maybe it could be hosted on esdiscuss.org. Or perhaps ecaa could host. A concern is the long term survivability of the archives. I’m fairly confident that https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss will be around for a long time. I’m less confident about about esdiscuss.org http://esdiscuss.org/ or es-discourse.com http://es-discourse.com/ Allen ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Re: Move es-discuss to discuss.webplatform.org?
OTOH I know people (dherman, cough) who can't hack the email load of es-discuss, and do not like the well-known email tendency to have threads run off the rails into endless digression and argumentation. But Arv's point about gmail mute feature is good. I think any competent email reader should have that. My biggest concern is that you can’t be selective in your consumption of es-discuss: It’s all or nothing (even if you only want to participate occasionally). The volume is daunting, esp. with a mobile device. -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de rauschma.de ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Re: Move es-discuss to discuss.webplatform.org?
Let's talk about this at July's TC39 meeting. Maybe we can have best of
both worlds, thanks to Discourse. (I don't think any such es-discuss
replacement should be on webplatform.org, FWIW -- that crosses the W3C
and Ecma streams.)
Having two es-dis{cuss,course} list-like things is not great. I hardly
ever look at es-discourse.com, although I've known about it for a while.
Does it lead to action with TC39 independent of what's raised here on
es-discuss@mozilla.org, or directly at meetings by Ecma members?
/be
Jordan Harband wrote:
http://es-discourse.com already exists as an alternative place to
discuss things if one doesn't wish to email this list. It may be worth
exploring using that more fully before asking TC39 to consider an
alternative to their existing mailing list.
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Re: Move es-discuss to discuss.webplatform.org?
(I don't think any such es-discuss
replacement should be on webplatform.org, FWIW -- that crosses the W3C
and Ecma streams.)
Is that such an issue? I was thinking the larger exposure and closer
working would be a bigger benefit than the mail management options.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:10 PM Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote:
Let's talk about this at July's TC39 meeting. Maybe we can have best of
both worlds, thanks to Discourse. (I don't think any such es-discuss
replacement should be on webplatform.org, FWIW -- that crosses the W3C
and Ecma streams.)
Having two es-dis{cuss,course} list-like things is not great. I hardly
ever look at es-discourse.com, although I've known about it for a while.
Does it lead to action with TC39 independent of what's raised here on
es-discuss@mozilla.org, or directly at meetings by Ecma members?
/be
Jordan Harband wrote:
http://es-discourse.com already exists as an alternative place to
discuss things if one doesn't wish to email this list. It may be worth
exploring using that more fully before asking TC39 to consider an
alternative to their existing mailing list.
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Re: Move es-discuss to discuss.webplatform.org?
Axel Rauschmayer wrote: My biggest concern is that you can’t be selective in your consumption of es-discuss: It’s all or nothing (even if you only want to participate occasionally). The volume is daunting, esp. with a mobile device. Long ago we had USENET and NNTP to help avoid having to read messages filed into folders. Mozilla ran bi-directional mail/news gateways. It sounds like Discourse can gateway to mail. Can it gateway from mail? In any case, your point is good. We can't just read esdiscuss.org, even though it tries to support editing and replying _in situ_ (IIRC). It has a few bugs where its nice abstractions leak messy email details. /be ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Re: Move es-discuss to discuss.webplatform.org?
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: Or perhaps ecaa could host. Ecma? HAHAHAHA! Ahem. Sorry. Judging from the IT outsourcing our people in Geneva do, I can only say: nope! Am I being unfair? Their Francs are as gold/green/orange/etc. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknotes_of_the_Swiss_franc) as anyone's. They could buy some cloud infra that's well devop'ed. But they haven't done this and seem to have no experience with it, or idea of it. I wouldn't want to be their learning experience. A concern is the long term survivability of the archives. I’m fairly confident that https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss will be around for a long time. I’m less confident about about esdiscuss.org http://esdiscuss.org or es-discourse.com http://es-discourse.com Fair point. Someone needs to step up, who does have the factory-IT bona-fides (on devops side; I agree Ecma can pay the bills). Anyone? /be ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
