Re: Swift style syntax

ce (as far as I know) you can pass operators as functions is > in arguments list of a function call. I don't know why but it doesn't work > with unary operators either: > ``` > let nums = [1,3,4]; > > > numsnums.map(++) // error > > ``` > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:

Re: Swift style syntax

+1 for operators as functions (I frequently is them in languages that have them), but there is an ambiguous case that frequently gets me: does `(-)` represent subtraction or negation. It's usually the former in languages with operators as functions. But here's a couple other potential syntactical

Re: Swift style syntax

Interesting trick, Andrea. Never thought of that before. On Mon, Oct 12, 2015, 02:31 Andrea Giammarchi wrote: > ... sort of (no pun intended) > > ```js > let sorted = names.sort((...$) => $[0] > $[1]); > ``` > > Regards > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 2:58 AM, Frankie

Re: rest parameters

probably larger issues in the algorithm itself. On Fri, Oct 9, 2015, 08:48 Andy Earnshaw <andyearns...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 at 19:59 Isiah Meadows <isiahmead...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Andy, look at my most recent post to this list. What do you think of th

Re: Re: Additional Math functions

+1 for operating on arrays, though. That's too common of a case for most of this. Either that or a common helper function: ```js function apply(xs, f) { return f(...xs) } [1, 2, 3, 4]->apply(Math.sum) ``` (There is talk of changing the syntax and splitting up the proposal in

Re: Re: Additional Math functions

Jason, I agree. Although I didn't exactly make it explicit enough, that was my basic reasoning. On Tue, Oct 6, 2015, 14:03 Jason Orendorff wrote: > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Alexander Jones wrote: > > What do other languages do? > > Well,

Re: Function.prototype.partial

gt;>> >>>> @timruffles >>>> >>>> - [1] I've been teaching newbies Javascript/Node.js for years, and if >>>> you take a 'functions first' approach it's complexity you have to tell them >>>> to ignore >>>> - [2] see github - >>>> https://github.com/search?l=javascript=%22.bind%28null%22=searchresults=Code=%E2%9C%93 >>>> >>>> ___ >>>> 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 >>> >> > > > ___ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > -- Isiah Meadows ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Re: rest parameters

owing will not be one. > > > Michaël Rouges - https://github.com/Lcfvs - @Lcfvs > > ___ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > -- Isiah Meadows __

Re: Re: Additional Math functions

; Rick > > >> >> >> Eli Perelman >> Mozilla >> ___ >> es-discuss mailing list >> es-discuss@mozilla.org >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > > > ___

Re: Reflect.getDefaultParameterValues

I'm thinking of the same questions. I have yet to think of any use cases for this. On Mon, Oct 5, 2015, 10:32 Thomas wrote: > My initial thoughts: > > Perhaps exposing parameter names isn't a good idea - perhaps just return > an array? You could easily pass an

Re: Fix Left-Associative Compound Conditional Statements!!

to normalize the title, know that I would prefer it be changed. > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Isiah Meadows <isiahmead...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I think the main issue with this idea, based on that thread, is the >> burden of proof it won't break the Web. N

Re: Death Before Confusion (was: [whatwg] Handling out of memory issues with getImageData/createImageData)

I see potential security benefits on the server side, though (e.g. Node). If someone manages to DDoS a server through a RAM heavy route, that can become a problem where it's safe to take extra precautions to avoid OOM, but the attacker can't add their own hooks without being able to execute

Re: Fix Left-Associative Compound Conditional Statements!!

I think the main issue with this idea, based on that thread, is the burden of proof it won't break the Web. No one seems to have actually tested it, yet. I don't know of any obfuscators that emit that from a transform (they only emit it if that was in the input), so my heuristic is that it likely

Re: Object.clone - not quite a proposal

I'll also point out that cloning DOM elements generally won't work as intended because DOM implementations sometimes tack on hidden properties that aren't even seen by the engine. Also, I know that V8 adds hidden properties to objects, which would have to be transferred as well. And this is where

Re: Template strings as a template language

Sent with the wrong subject... On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Isiah Meadows <isiahmead...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think you forgot to change the subject/strip other content/etc. ;) > > Plus, I learned the hard way myself that it's easier to have my > subscription set to forwar

Re: Template strings as a template language.

>> >> >> Bob >> >> >> ___ >> es-discuss mailing list >> es-discuss@mozilla.org >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> > > > > -- > Cheers, > --MarkM > > _

Re: Weak References

} > }, interval) > > // Return a strong reference > return res > } > ``` > > Sorry for the ambiguity. > > (edited out a few bugs from the original) (it got corrupted when saving somehow :-( ) On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 11:34 PM, Mark S. Miller <erig...@googl

Re: Weak References

It's replacing the prototype of a stream periodically to point to a new writable file output stream pointing to a new file, but I want to kill the interval timer when the object is garbage collected. Something like this: 1. Create new stream. 2. Point it to a log file. 3. Every tick on a given

Re: Weak References

ttp://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:weak_references > does this implement your intention? > > > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Isiah Meadows <isiahmead...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> It's replacing the prototype of a stream periodically to point to a ne

Re: Weak References

oogle.com> wrote: On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Isiah Meadows <isiahmead...@gmail.com> wrote: That's actually the feature I need... Hi Isiah and Thomas, what "That"? If you mean pre-mortem finalization, like Java's Object.finalize or the cited node callbacks (whose pre

Re: Weak References

. Are you using that feature? Perhaps destructors might be worth > thinking about as well alongside weak references (then again, maybe this > putting too much of the underlying gc implementation into the spec). > > Thomas > > On 5 Sep 2015, at 9:07 PM, Isiah Meadows <isiahmead...@gm

Weak References

would be anything significant. [1]: https://esdiscuss.org/topic/what-is-the-status-of-weak-references [2]: https://github.com/TooTallNate/node-weak -- Isiah Meadows ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es

Re: Exponentiation operator precedence

I agree with that completely. This would also become a gotcha. I can see a lot of people down the road thinking -x ** 2 === -x**2, only to find that's not the case. It looks like it should, which will quickly lead to hard to find bugs. I think it's a terrible idea, but that's just my opinion. On

Re: Exponentiation operator precedence

Not much, as far as I can tell. Engines do usually lower this, and redo the whole object when the shape changes, or an intrinsic no longer applies. V8 has a MathPow intrinsic, and I believe SpiderMonkey has similar. On Wed, Aug 26, 2015, 23:45 Jordan Harband ljh...@gmail.com wrote: Is there

Re: Exponentiation operator precedence

I like this. It works very well. On Tue, Aug 25, 2015, 12:38 Claude Pache claude.pa...@gmail.com wrote: I think the following grammar could work. Replace the current (ES2015) PostfixExpression production with: ``` IncrementExpression: LeftHandSideExpression LeftHandSideExpression

Re: Exponentiation operator precedence

So far, I like the idea of exponentiation having identical precedence to unary `+`/`-`, and lower than the increment operators. That sounds like it should work pretty well. ``` x ** y // x^y -x ** y // -(x^y) x ** -y // x^(-y) ++x ** y === (++x) ** y x++ ** y === (x++) ** y x ** ++y === x **

Re: Reified lvalue (was: Re: Extensible destructuring proposal)

No problem. I was aware of the intent. Also, I cc'd the list for you. P.S. I did state it as pointless bikeshedding, so I did kinda leave myself open for criticism for merely bringing it up. On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, 02:08 Herby Vojčík he...@mailbox.sk wrote: Isiah Meadows wrote: I know

Re: System.import()?

There are ways for syncing promises for Node compatibility, although they all lie in C++ land. Similar has already been done with Node callbacks. https://www.npmjs.com/package/sync (You could also spawn a thread, block for a message, and join it with the promise result from a C++ callback from a

Re: Re: Existential Operator / Null Propagation Operator

-1 for the `!` idea. It feels redundant to me, since if you try calling an undefined value, it'll throw errors at you. It doesn't seem to insure anything extra beyond current behavior. On Wed, Aug 19, 2015, 02:27 Tingan Ho tinga...@gmail.com wrote: One thing to keep in mind is that with prefix

Re: Reified lvalue (was: Re: Extensible destructuring proposal)

I know this is pointless bikeshedding, but that particular operator conflicts with a current valid production. ```js // These are synonymous, and are // valid statements tmp0 - input.get('c') tmp0 (-input.get('c')) ``` On Wed, Aug 19, 2015, 09:53 Herby Vojčík he...@mailbox.sk wrote: Bergi

Re: System.import()?

I agree that it could stand to wait. Also, for what it's worth, the WHATWG loader spec is still a huge work in progress AFAIK. On Mon, Aug 17, 2015, 18:02 Bradley Meck bradley.m...@gmail.com wrote: The timing and extensibility is too complex to easily fit into ECMA-262, see some things

Re: `null` and default arguments

Thanks! I understand now. On Mon, Aug 17, 2015, 17:16 Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote: See https://esdiscuss.org/topic/default-operator-strawman-rather-than#content-13 and surrounding thread. /be Isiah Meadows wrote: I know it's a little late for this, but what

Re: Proposal for a null coalescing operator

This is something I frequently make a helper function out of. ```js function d(argument, default_) { return argument != null ? argument : default_ } ``` On Sun, Aug 16, 2015, 20:34 Brandon Andrews warcraftthre...@sbcglobal.net wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_coalescing_operator

`null` and default arguments

I know it's a little late for this, but what was the rationale of using only `undefined` instead of both that and `null` to denote omitted values for optional arguments in ES6? Before this change, it was a frequent idiom to check optional arguments via `== null` instead of `=== undefined` and pass

Re: Named Arrow Functions

:00, Nick Krempel ndkrem...@google.com escribió: On 12 August 2015 at 02:56, Isiah Meadows isiahmead...@gmail.com wrote: ```js let p = new Promise((resolve, reject) = setTimeout((x = () = x(x))(handler = { onNotNeeded(() = clearTimeout(handler)); // `return` is to take advantage

Re: UInt8ClampedArray Bitwise operators?

I can see why, since nearly everyone depends on that coupling. Minifiers depend on it. Mixin utilities depend on it. Breaking the Web would be an understatement. On Wed, Aug 12, 2015, 14:36 Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote: Caitlin Potter wrote: ES2015 already has element accessor

Re: UInt8ClampedArray Bitwise operators?

Oh. Pardon my ignorance. Misunderstood the idea. On Wed, Aug 12, 2015, 23:19 Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote: On Aug 12, 2015, at 7:30 PM, Isiah Meadows wrote: I can see why, since nearly everyone depends on that coupling. Minifiers depend on it. Mixin utilities depend

Re: Named Arrow Functions

Sent this too early... Corrected inline. On Tue, Aug 11, 2015, 21:56 Isiah Meadows isiahmead...@gmail.com wrote: The real reason people need named arrow functions, the biggest use case is for event handlers. ```js let p = new Promise((resolve, reject) = setTimeout((x = () = x(x))(handler

Re: please add x .= f()

ago about where sugar can become a problem itself, especially when there's 2-3 ways to write 7-8 basic constructs. [1]) [1]: https://github.com/gkz/LiveScript/issues/721 On Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 22:27 Bergi a.d.be...@web.de wrote: Isiah Meadows schrieb: That's not really the point

Re: Named Arrow Functions

The real reason people need named arrow functions, the biggest use case is for event handlers. ```js let p = new Promise((resolve, reject) = setTimeout((x = () = x(x))(handler = { onNotNeeded(() = clearTimeout(handler)); // `return` is to take advantage of TCO return

Re: Named Arrow Functions

And as Kevin said, it has been mentioned before (with event handlers and timeouts as the initial driving force). https://esdiscuss.org/topic/self-recursion-and-arrow-functions On Tue, Aug 11, 2015, 21:57 Isiah Meadows isiahmead...@gmail.com wrote: Sent this too early... Corrected inline

Re: UInt8ClampedArray Bitwise operators?

Do SIMD types solve your problem? https://github.com/tc39/ecmascript_simd On Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 10:58 Michael McGlothlin mike.mcgloth...@gmail.com wrote: Would there be a downside to extending Bitwise operators to work with typed arrays such as UInt8ClampedArray? To me it seems natural to

Re: please add orEqual operator

The original idea was a default assign operator, like CoffeeScript's `?=`. And the idea of testing multiple values is currently best done with `switch` statements. I would love a simpler alternative, though. (This is something that engines could simply desugar, though, much like default arguments

Re: please add orEqual operator

Agreed. On Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 20:41 Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote: Oops, sorry. You were punning with pattern-matching there ;-). Can this thread die? /be Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Brendan Eichbren...@mozilla.org wrote: Please search for older

Re: please add x .= f()

That's not really the point. The suggestion is this instead: ```js if (s[0] === '/') s = s.slice(1); if (s[0] === '/') s .= slice(1); ``` This already exists in CoffeeScript and most derivatives/dialects. ```coffee s .= slice 1 if s[0] is '/' ``` Don't know of any other languages that have an

Re: please add orEqual operator

Or, there is the likely ES7 Array#contains for comparing multiple numbers. ```js [1, 2, 3].contains(value); ``` As for the operator proposed here, there's already an existing proposal for a safer version which doesn't coerce: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:default_operator. On

Re: Cancelable promises proposal

Am I the only one that sees this concept best left as a user Promise subclass? Especially since I'm still seeing some disagreement on even what the problem is that's needing solved. On Sat, Aug 8, 2015, 05:02 Glen Huang curvedm...@gmail.com wrote: Note that when you attach a reaction (through

Re: What do you think about a C# 6 like nameof() expression for JavaScript.

Call me crazy, but I don't see anything that couldn't be done more concisely with a string literal. Is it supposed to be able to do this? ```js function foo(x) { return nameof(x); } foo(bar); // bar; ``` In that case, the engine would have to keep track of usages as well, in a similar sense

Re: What do you think about a C# 6 like nameof() expression for JavaScript.

. There are other uses of `nameof`, but they all boil down to roughly the same thing. Ron -- From: Isiah Meadows isiahmead...@gmail.com Sent: ‎8/‎8/‎2015 7:23 PM To: Behrang Saeedzadeh behran...@gmail.com; EcmaScript Discuss Mailing List es-discuss@mozilla.org Subject

Re: Extensible destructuring proposal

-- did you mean statically typed, or with fully static name binding? JS does lack those, although strict mode gets close to fully static name binding (the global object can still sprout new properties that may be referenced via free variables). /be Isiah Meadows wrote: On Wed, Aug 5

Re: Extensible destructuring proposal

The alternative is proxies. On Wed, Aug 5, 2015, 15:26 Samuel Hapák samuel.ha...@vacuumapps.com wrote: Thank you for your reply Andreas! So, let's split this discussion into two parts: i) Whether there is a good use case for non-standard data structures like Immutable.js in place of standard

Re: es-discuss Digest, Vol 102, Issue 14

encourage you to come up with more convincing examples in the JavaScript context. Short of that, I'd argue that the complexity is not justified, at least for the time being. /Andreas -- Isiah Meadows ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https

Re: Extensible destructuring proposal

Damnit...forgot to fix the subject. On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: Wait...this got me thinking... The proposal itself doesn't bring along a lot of merits, but it seems like it could be a great stepping stone to a limited pattern matching syntax

Re: Extensible destructuring proposal

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015, 04:29 Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: Good point. I did make most of the natives identity functions returning the object itself for most cases with the prolyfill, which engines should easily detect at run time and inline into nothingness. But I do see your point

Re: self functions

+1 for the decorator/function solution. It hardly affects performance in practice, since the resulting wrapped function is a whopping two lines by itself, and engines can optimize that very easily and efficiently. I don't think there needs to be new syntax for it. One thing I like about

ES5 functions

Is my understanding correct in this scope generalization of pre-ES6 functions? I know a lot of people never really understood scoping, especially in ES5, very well, but I got thinking and found it seemed incredibly simple. - Each function has its own context, independent of any closure. ```js

Generalize do-expressions to statements in general?

{ value } ``` -- Isiah Meadows ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Re: Generalize do-expressions to statements in general?

something? Examples inline: On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: I was reading a recent thread https://esdiscuss.org/topic/allow-try-catch-blocks-to-return-a-value where do-expressions simplified a common try-catch use case, and I was wondering if `do` could

Re: Generalize do-expressions to statements in general?

On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: To be perfectly honest, though, I'm not entirely sure the specifics of the do-expression proposal, since Google is failing me here (can't find a thing giving more detail than this mailing list). And as for what my

Unbound arrow functions?

There already exists a syntax for lexically bound functions, but couldn't there be an unbound counterpart? I am aware I brought this up before, but I'm still missing it with smaller methods that still need `this`. It's easy to macro, but it feels weird to have a lexically bound lambda and not an

Re: ES6 Proxy Function Call Trap

To be honest, you could simply subclass Proxy to add an invoke hook, if it's that simple: ```js function makeHandler(handler) { let {get, invoke} = handler; let lastGet = false; let opts = {}; Object.keys(opts) .filter(key = key !== 'get' key !== 'call') .map(key = [key,

Re: Example of real world usage of function bind syntax

Yeah, I am. Oops. Sorry about that. On Fri, Jun 12, 2015, 13:41 Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote: Any chance you could reply so that your messages show up in thread? Are you reading by digest mode, possibly? /be Isiah Meadows wrote: I need to be using this library! I, myself, used

Re: Example of real world usage of function bind syntax

I need to be using this library! I, myself, used the syntax for virtual methods quite a bit, and personally replicated a third of your library without realizing it. Also, it's a lot easier and nicer to type `foo.map(::this.bar)` than `foo.map(this.bar.bind(this))` or `foo.map(x = this.bar(x))`. I

RE: Expression Closures as Compliment to Arrow Functions

Would this be rectifiable with something like an unbound lambda type syntax? You could even make an analogous equivalent for classes. ```js // Lambda, unbound, ASI applies, same precedence as current arrow functions () - foo; (x) - bar(1, x); x - bar(1, x); // same as previous (...args) -

Re: *.empty Idea

. Does anyone see any problems or have any objections, beyond I don't think there's a use case? On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Isiah Meadows isiahmead...@gmail.com wrote: I really liked Jordan Harband's suggestion of adding Array.empty, Function.empty, etc. to ES7. It is relatively easy

Re: A Declarative replacement for toMethod

What about this? Would this satisfy the metaprogramming problem? ```js Object.getOwnPropertyNames(obj) .map(name = [name, obj[name]]) .filter(keepCorrectFunctions) .map(([name, f]) = { obj mixin { [name + 'Async'](...args) { return new Promise((resolve, reject) = f.call(this,

Re: *.empty Idea

On Feb 23, 2015 3:31 PM, Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com wrote: On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Isiah Meadows isiahmead...@gmail.com wrote: On Feb 23, 2015 6:06 AM, Andrea Giammarchi andrea.giammar...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Jordan Harband ljh...@gmail.com

Re: Array.prototype change (Was: @@toStringTag spoofing for null and undefined)

Is Array.prototype an exotic Array Instance? Or is it still a standard exotic object? This is somewhat relevant to V8 bug 3890 https://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=3890, which is targeted at implementing that change. -- Isiah Meadows ___ es

*.empty Idea

, such as `String.empty` or `RegExp.empty`. -- Isiah Meadows ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Re: extends null

Couldn't one of these be enough? ```js var Null = {prototype: {__proto__: null}}; var Null = {prototype: Object.create(null)}; class Foo extends Null {} ``` ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Re: include 'foo/index.js' or include 'foo'?

Doh... I really slipped on this one... On Feb 6, 2015 3:21 AM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: The current spec being worked on to resolve this problem is at http://whatwg.github.io/loader. It's still under construction, but it's being written with browser and Node interop in mind

Re: es-discuss Digest, Vol 96, Issue 16

Ignore that email... :( On Feb 6, 2015 3:21 AM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: The current spec being worked on to resolve this problem is at http://whatwg.github.io/loader. It's still under construction, but it's being written with browser and Node interop in mind

Re: es-discuss Digest, Vol 96, Issue 16

The current spec being worked on to resolve this problem is at http://whatwg.github.io/loader. It's still under construction, but it's being written with browser and Node interop in mind. From: John Barton johnjbar...@google.com To: Glen Huang curvedm...@gmail.com Cc: monolithed

Re: include 'foo/index.js' or include 'foo'?

1. I made a mistake sending the email initially. 2. I was referencing the spec for the future module loader. 3. I think you meant to hit Reply All. On Feb 6, 2015 10:27 AM, John Barton johnjbar...@google.com wrote: ? On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote

Re: @@toStringTag spoofing for null and undefined

From: Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com To: Gary Guo nbdd0...@hotmail.com Cc: es-discuss@mozilla.org es-discuss@mozilla.org Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 07:11:35 -0800 Subject: Re: @@toStringTag spoofing for null and undefined Of course it can, by tamper proofing (essentially, freezing)

Re: JavaScript 2015?

@all Should we rename this list to es-bikeshed? Seems to fit with the theme here. ;) In all reality, I'm strongly considering asking Oracle about the specific enforcement status of the JavaScript trademark. If (and when) I do, I'll forward as much information as I can here.

Re: es-discuss Digest, Vol 95, Issue 82

From: Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org To: Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de Cc: Arthur Stolyar nekr.fab...@gmail.com, es-discuss list es-discuss@mozilla.org Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 17:32:48 -0800 Subject: Re: JavaScript 2015? I wouldn't hold my breath. Sun was not ever in the mood, even

Re: JavaScript 2015?

Send it with the right metadata... On Jan 22, 2015 10:36 PM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: From: Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org To: Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de Cc: Arthur Stolyar nekr.fab...@gmail.com, es-discuss list es-discuss@mozilla.org Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 17

Re: A new ES6 draft is available

Okay. Thanks. On Jan 19, 2015 11:32 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote: On Jan 19, 2015, at 5:32 AM, Fabrício Matté wrote: Your second example may break if the constructor is called via `.call()`/`.apply()` or as a *CallExpression : MemberExpression* or if it has been

Re: es-discuss Digest, Vol 95, Issue 45

From: Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com To: Fabrício Matté ultco...@gmail.com Cc: es-discuss es-discuss@mozilla.org Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 12:14:17 -0800 Subject: Re: A new ES6 draft is available On Jan 17, 2015, at 11:57 AM, Fabrício Matté wrote: Currently in ES6, the only

Re: Implicit coercion of Symbols

second thoughts, but I thought it'd be worth linking to the previous thread for anyone who hasn't seen it and thinks this is a new debate. Good catch. I wouldn't have been surprised if nobody even thought of it until now (in this discussion, anyways). -- Isiah Meadows

Re: (x) = {foo: bar}

Okay: is this a valid statement/expression? I didn't think so, but I may be wrong. ```js ({ foo(); bar(); }) ``` On Jan 6, 2015 11:16 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue Jan 06 2015 at 2:18:47 AM Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: From: Alex Kocharin

Re: {Spam?} Re: (x) = {foo: bar}

That's what I thought. Didn't think I had gone crazy there. On Jan 6, 2015 5:45 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote: Isiah Meadows wrote: Okay: is this a valid statement/expression? I didn't think so, but I may be wrong. ```js ({ foo(); bar(); }) ``` It's a syntax error, in any

Re: (x) = {foo: bar}

, as `{a, b, c}` is technically both a valid block and object (using shorthand properties). The problems would then become non-obvious and difficult to diagnose in practice. -- Isiah Meadows ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https

Re: es-discuss Digest, Vol 95, Issue 19

wrote in 2011 lives on. /be ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss -- Isiah Meadows ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https

Re: Implicit coercion of Symbols

Forgot to retitle it. On Jan 3, 2015 9:44 PM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: From: Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de To: bren...@mozilla.org Cc: es-discuss list es-discuss@mozilla.org Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2015 03:17:54 +0100 Subject: Re: Implicit coercion of Symbols Does it have

Re: Add to the list members

From: monolithed monolit...@gmail.com To: es-discuss@mozilla.org Cc: Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2015 19:28:28 +0400 Subject: Add to the list members Hi, please add me to the list members The best regards, Alexander https://github.com/monolithed Here's you a link:

Re: es-discuss Digest, Vol 95, Issue 14

} ``` -- Isiah Meadows ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Re: es-discuss Digest, Vol 95, Issue 9

From: Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de To: bren...@mozilla.org Cc: es-discuss list es-discuss@mozilla.org Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2015 03:17:54 +0100 Subject: Re: Implicit coercion of Symbols Does it have to be a Reflect.* method? It could be `Symbol.prototype.getDescription()` or a getter. On

Re: Throwing when symbol *wrappers* are converted to primitives

From: Claude Pache claude.pa...@gmail.com To: Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de Cc: Erik Arvidsson erik.arvids...@gmail.com, es-discuss list es-discuss@mozilla.org Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 09:04:43 +0100 Subject: Re: Throwing when symbol *wrappers* are converted to primitives Le 27 déc.

Re: es-discuss Digest, Vol 94, Issue 84

That search (`/([']?)enumerable\1\s:\strue/`) would miss quite a few intentional cases as well, because IIRC Object.create and friends default to false for each of the descriptors, enumerable, configurable, and writable. Maybe, that could be better run with this ast-types visitor or similar? Note

Re: Any news about the `module` element?

From: Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com To: Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl Cc: es-discuss list es-discuss@mozilla.org Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 14:45:08 -0800 Subject: Re: Any news about the `module` element? On Dec 21, 2014, at 10:10 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Sun, Dec 21,

Re: Any news about the `module` element?

I found [this][1] a while back, and can't seem to find any discussion or specification more up to date than this document until this thread. I know it could be a little off topic, but just throwing it out there. [1]: https://whatwg.github.io/loader/

Re: Any news about the `module` element?

Awesome. On Dec 21, 2014 8:14 PM, Caridy Patino car...@gmail.com wrote: Isiah, yes, we are still trying to get some traction on that repo. we will be adding some docs related to this discussion soon. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 21, 2014, at 6:44 PM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote

How are modules imported from a ScriptBody without System?

with a few other inconsistencies, most notably a distinct disconnect between loading a ModuleBody and a ScriptBody, with no apparent way for a ScriptBody to load a ModuleBody. This concerns me a little. -- Isiah Meadows ___ es-discuss mailing list es

Re: How are modules imported from a ScriptBody without System?

AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote: On Dec 8, 2014, at 8:23 AM, Isiah Meadows wrote: Also, this removal seems to have left quite a bit of spec equivalent to dead code, Can you identify specific instances in the latest draft? In theory, I've already eliminated all such dead

Re: How are modules imported from a ScriptBody without System?

Forgot to link the bug... :( Here it is: https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3421 Also, I filed this: https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3422 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: @Allen I did find a few cases of obvious dead spec code

Re: Standard module API/specification?

: The specification of these modules has been delayed, it won’t be in ES6. On 29 Nov 2014, at 7:38 , Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: Where would I be able to find specifications on (proposed) standard modules such as @iter? Google isn't being my friend in finding these (except for @iter

Standard module API/specification?

Where would I be able to find specifications on (proposed) standard modules such as @iter? Google isn't being my friend in finding these (except for @iter, which I knew where to look). -- Isiah Meadows ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org

Re: Importing modules that don't exist

andrea.giammar...@gmail.com wrote: a native ImportError seems to me the best option and it's also easy to polyfill in a meaningful way with all current module loaders used already out there. just my 2 cents On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 3:10 AM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote: Should we

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >