Anyone have ideas on more examples? It’s tempting to make a transpiler
plugin to see how it works in practice, but I’d like to see more examples
first. Thanks
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 1:12 PM Jacob Bloom
wrote:
> Maybe it would be less footgunny to support autovivification in a more
>
com>
> wrote:
> > LibreJS looks like a browser extension, not a JS engine...
> >
> > Aside, wow, I'm in favor of open-source, but this one is pretty out
> there.
> >
> > --
> > Michael J. Ryan - http://tracker1.info
> >
> >
> > On Tue, A
LibreJS? The FSF is seriously escalating the plugin/scripting issue?
Joe
On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 4:07 PM, J Decker <d3c...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Andrea Giammarchi <
> andrea.giammar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I guess when it
in
generator bodies?)
Specifically, I'm referring to step 5 in IsInTailPosition that returns
false (
http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0/index.html#sec-isintailposition)
if the body is a generator body.
Thanks!
Joe P
___
es-discuss mailing list
es
@JoePea, that is one of the syntaxes I recommend in the proposal.
@michalwadas The primary goal of this I think is to create a standard feature,
but I do not see why an expression wrapped in parenthesis ultimately resulting
in an error class would not be supported.
Example:
...
} catch
Ah, that does somewhat throw a wrench in the system. I'm not sure what the
committee's policy is on backwards compatibility and non-standard features. I
find the SpiderMonkey handling you just brought to my attention to be a little
clunky.
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 13, 2016, at 11:26 AM,
this).
Still, even they would be better than nothing.
Cheers,
Joe
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 1:45 PM, David Bruant <bruan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 01/12/2015 20:20, Michał Wadas a écrit :
>>
>>
>> As we all know, JavaScript as language lacks builtin randomness related
&
Didn't send to list, something is wrong with my reply all. Sorry about
that. Stupid mobile gmail.
-- Forwarded message --
From: "joe" <joe...@gmail.com>
Date: Sep 8, 2015 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: Object id, hash, etc?
To: "Garrett Smith" <dhtmlki
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Alexander Jones a...@weej.com wrote:
Ethan is making my point far better than I did, and I agree completely about
the issue of unary operators visually appearing more tightly bound than
binary operators.
At this point it seems fair to at least acknowledge the
assignment operator might be a different matter (I've not thought it
through, though).
Best,
Joe
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Fabrício Matté ultco...@gmail.com wrote:
What you've described seems very similar to PHP's static variables
http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.scope.php
recently implemented ES6 modules
as a little require.js loader plugin (it only transpiles the module
syntax, since Chrome now has most everything else in ES6), perhaps
I'll write a little plugin for this, too. Then I can use it in only
the half-dozen or so files that really need it.
Joe
Joe
the VMs probably will. . . perhaps the TC39 committee
should *mandate* that they do so formally, in the spec. Then people like
me could stop violating bits of the standard that aren't workable with how
today's VMs work, like the return value of .next methods in iterators.
Joe
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015
extensions such as this.
What do people think? Too many normative problems?
Best,
Joe
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
variadic function, I suppose:
if (select(a, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)) {
}
Cheers,
Joe
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:09 AM, myemailu...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks I'll be searching through archive, and yea i think this is
something very simple and yet innovative.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 3:55 AM, Peter
into a huge switch
statement or unreadable set of ternary expressions just to avoid that cost.
I’m quite sure someone will point out how wrong I am on any or all of the
above points any moment now, I can’t wait =)
On Aug 10, 2015, at 1:15 PM, joe joe...@gmail.com wrote:
I actually like `[1, 2, 3, 4
Do you know *why* python gets away with that, though? It forcibly
amortizes the GC cost by using a hybrid reference counting/cyclic
collector scheme. That's not exactly fast, either, which is why no
one else does it.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
systems natively.
Joe
On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Morningstar, Chip cmornings...@paypal.com
wrote:
I confess I don't see the point of this proposal at all, at least with
respect to being specifically about JSON.
JSON parsing/stringification is pure computation; it's not like I/O where
you
JSON parsing is such a slow process that it motivated me to re-invent
Google Protobufs (in a nice, JS-friendly way, see
https://github.com/joeedh/STRUCT/wiki/Intro-and-Examples ). I never use
JSON in production code for this reason. An async api isn't a bad idea.
Joe
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 8
relatively undeveloped.
Joe
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Soni L. fakedme...@gmail.com wrote:
Could add f{} as sugar for f({}), and make engines optimize f{}? (no
positional arguments though)
On 31/07/15 12:00 PM, Michał Wadas wrote:
Proposal that do not conflict with minimifiers
[sorry forgot to reply to all]
-- Forwarded message --
From: joe joe...@gmail.com
Date: Jun 25, 2015 5:34 PM
Subject: Re: insteadof operator
To: Bergi a.d.be...@web.de
Cc:
Would there be any security issues? Also, runtime or lexical scope?
I've actually wanted this feature
suff like:
Bleh.prototype.bleh.call(this)
Replaced with:
super.bleh();
I thought I would jump for joy.
Anyway, I'm incredibly grateful to the TC39 committed for their work.
Thanks,
Joe
P.S.
. . .If a mailing list must have noise a well as signal, why not have
positive noise mixed
). At least I find it helpful.
However, it did require Yet Another Cover Grammar, so I dunno if it's
appropriate here.
Best,
Joe
On Jun 8, 2015 9:19 PM, Luke Scott l...@webconnex.com wrote:
Hello All,
I wanted to share some ideas with you for type hinting:
https://github.com/lukescott/es-type
Hay, I've not read all of the spec, and I've implemented much of it. :P
Joe
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote:
Not all browsers have implemented the spec yet. But you should read the
spec before proposing changes to it!
*From:* Alexander Jones
literals wasn't easy (it's not strictly possible to parse them
with a RE tokenizer, but I managed to hackishly make it work).
Joe
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Park, Daejun dpar...@illinois.edu wrote:
Hi,
Is there any parser for ES6? It seems that no implementation completely
supports ES6
Replies interspersed below
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:48 AM, James Burke jrbu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote:
Indeed, there is no built-in facility for bundling since as explained
in this thread that will actually slow down your
What I do is send the files over in as TAR archives, with mod_deflate
turned on (they basically turn into .tar.gz files at that point). It's
reasonably fast, even though I'm processing thirty megabytes of data this
way (yay for typed arrays). I highly recommend it.
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 7:57
That's a good point. Are lexical non-DFA grammars allowed? It would be
trivial to solve that with a regular expression lookahead. Although I
suppose at that point you might as well call it a cover grammar.
Joe
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote:
joe wrote
(a);
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote:
joe wrote:
That's a good point. Are lexical non-DFA grammars allowed? It would be
trivial to solve that with a regular expression lookahead. Although I
suppose at that point you might as well call it a cover
That looks workable. Does anyone have any more comments on '.?' versus
'?.' ?
Joe
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Sebastian McKenzie seb...@gmail.com wrote:
No, you’d just memoise it to a variable:
a?.d().f?.b
to:
var _temp, _temp2;
(a != undefined ? (temp = a.d() != undefined
Regardless of what the spec says, you cannot avoid singleton iterators in
real-world code. In my opinion, the spec should refrain from specifying
when object creation happens within the iteration protocol, wait for the
relevant code and contract patterns to develop and then include something
in
I hacked together something similar myself. IIRC, this particular
transformation has issues with nested operators (e.g. a.b?.c.d?.e.f?.h).
Of course that's an implementation detail, but the problem (if I'm
remembering it right) is that people couldn't figure out what the
implementation
, this is a very simple use case. Supporting e.g. function calls
would require more tokens (which raises the question: why stop at '.'?
Should we have arithmetic versions too?). Given the proliferation of
binary operator tokens in JS, I'm not sure if this is a good thing.
Joe
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015
async libraries.
Joe
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Boopathi Rajaa legend.r...@gmail.com
wrote:
Why do we have both?
Why do we have both values and arrays, not just the latter?
--
https://annevankesteren.nl
.
It's not terribly important to me since I seem to average one use case of
multiple inheritance every fifty thousand lines of code or so, and I can
usually fudge it. I'm just curious if multiple inheritance is on the radar
or not. Thanks.
Best,
Joe
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 8:00 AM, joe joe
is proposing we *remove* the old prototypal stuff.
The class syntax solves one set of problems. The more flexible prototypal
stuff solves another, and from my own experience they work pretty well
together.
Joe
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Benjamin (Inglor) Gruenbaum
ing...@gmail.com wrote
people may not have any choice but to optimize it.
Joe
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Again, where does this mutation occur? The spec shouldn't allow any such
thing to begin with; it should mandate exactly what my compiler does: as
soon as .next returns, copy .value into the loop variable. The developer
shouldn't have any access to the return value from within the loop at all;
if
are
important for such things.
Frankly, I find this sudden embrace of good coding practices odd in a
language that practically sets the floor for how horrendously mutable a
dynamic runtime language can get.
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 3:35 PM, joe joe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 7:16 AM
part.
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Benjamin (Inglor) Gruenbaum
ing...@gmail.com wrote:
Joe, I don't think we're having the same discussion.
Again, this is about the issue Katelyn raised about the return value of
`.next`.
Katelyn suggested that the return value of a `.next` call
. This does
seem a bit silly.
Joe
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Monday, June 30, 2014, Frankie Bagnardi f.bagna...@gmail.com wrote:
String.prototype.endsWith and Object.is are functions, and their JS
implementations are nontrivial to memorize
identity among JS
developers is fooling themselves.
I'm on the side of TC39, by the way. I don't believe in democracy in
software. That's why we have standards organizations.
Joe
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:41 PM, Garrett Smith dhtmlkitc...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 6/20/14, David Bruant bruan
they work in practice.
Best,
Joe
On May 27, 2014 12:03 AM, Claude Pache claude.pa...@gmail.com wrote:
Since nobody gave their advice, I'll give my own one :-)
The particular case of the Existential Operator (conditional property
access and conditional method call) is probably the more usual
I don't think silent fails are always a bad thing. I've been trying to
make my code robust against unexpected nulls, preferably only in release
mode. That's not always easy to do, though (restricting the behavior to
release builds), which is why I consciously chose to wait a year until the
code
After writing an ES6-ES5 compiler, I've come to the conclusion that ES5
*is* an intermediary language. For dynamic, duck-typed languages it's not
so bad.
I always found the Dart people's arguments the most persuasive:
https://www.dartlang.org/articles/why-not-bytecode/
Basically, any language
the presence of one ?. operator causes the entire chain (including
normal .'s) to be transformed. Not sure what the side effects of this
would be, performance-wise.
Joe
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Dmitry Soshnikov
dmitry.soshni...@gmail.com wrote:
Woah! :) 2012 -- so I correctly recalled couple
extensions.
Or would the sourcemaps contain their own AST definitions?
Joe
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Is the function* syntax for generators final? I'm curious what the
justification for it is, but mostly I just need to know if it's likely to
change.
Thanks,
Joe
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es
has yet to switch back, and before I bug the
developers on that project I wanted to make sure that StopIteration is, in
fact, back.
Thanks,
Joe Eagar
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
.
To answer your question, the iterator protocol hasn't changed back to
using StopIteration. It's still { value, done }.
On Feb 20, 2014, at 2:27 AM, joe joe...@gmail.com wrote:
A while back, the wiki Harmony draft spec for iterators changed from a
Pythonic StopIteration approach to one where
Sent from my Cricket smartphone
es-discuss-requ...@mozilla.org wrote:
Send es-discuss mailing list submissions to
es-discuss@mozilla.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
or, via email, send a message with
Chrome appears to follow the spec a little closer. Observe the following:
var someVar = 5;
//valid syntax, throws ReferenceError
function passPlease(){
alert(someVar);
}
//invalid syntax, throws SyntaxError
function failPlease(){
alert(someVar);
}
-Joe
Allen Wirfs-Brock al
jQuery is a somewhat poor / extreme example - jQuery has taken a monolithic
approach to code structuring - while more modern and full featured
frameworks tend towards load-on-demand, and hence can offer
'capability-loading'.
That said, I do think that it is worth keeping in mind that there will
If you're curious about interpreters, I'd like to point out that we have
one that we think is pretty decent:
https://github.com/brownplt/LambdaS5
It now has reasonable, though incomplete, coverage of Test262:
http://cs.brown.edu/~joe/public/results/summary.html
Further, it implements much
What makes people happy is probably complex and somewhat different for
different people.
I think that for many in this particular line of work it could probably be
identified by 'being in the zone'. I find that it tends to accompany a sense
of accomplishment, discovery by creation of value ( be
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Juan Ignacio Dopazo dopazo.j...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Joe Developer joe.d.develo...@gmail.com
wrote:
I was very close to mentioning in my response to Brendan that the first
thing that came to mind regarding deep nesting
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Juan Ignacio Dopazo
dopazo.j...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Joe Developer
joe.d.develo...@gmail.comwrote:
Truthfully the - arrow construct is one that I have an aversion to which
borders ( I'll admit ) on the irrational
My emails
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Mikeal Rogers mikeal.rog...@gmail.comwrote:
I would implore those doing this design work to offer greater weight to the
options of people who are *using* the language more than they are spending
their time on this list.
Users are generally under-represented
language
deficiencies.
I think an important question here is:
Who are you actually trying to serve with your changes?
-- Joe Developer
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
___
es
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Juan Ignacio Dopazo
dopazo.j...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Joe Developer
joe.d.develo...@gmail.comwrote:
I'll admit that in my years I have never run into a situation where I
found myself forced into nesting levels that I found
59 matches
Mail list logo
