On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Thomas thomasjamesfos...@bigpond.com wrote:
There's still the issue of exponentiation being right-associative. Unless **
becomes an operator which behaves differently as to how it would in a high
school maths class, we're at an impasse.
I'm not sure I follow.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com wrote:
I don't get it. The conflict between
* the history of ** in other languages,
* the general pattern that unary binds tighter than binary
seems unresolvable. By the first bullet, -2 ** 2 would be -4. By the second,
it
On Aug 26, 2015, at 11:03 AM, Raul-Sebastian Mihăilă wrote:
In 9.1.11. it's specified that the iterator returned by the [[Enumerate]]
method iterates over String-valued keys. But the informative definition at
the end of 9.1.11. is based on whatever is returned by calling
Reflect.enumerate
On Aug 26, 2015, at 9:09 AM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
I don't get it. The conflict between
* the history of ** in other languages,
* the general pattern that unary binds tighter than binary
seems unresolvable. By the first bullet, -2 ** 2 would be -4. By the second,
it would be 4. Either
I think the better idea would be related to value types (
http://www.slideshare.net/BrendanEich/value-objects2) which brendan is
working on for ES7.
I fuzzily recall rounding modes being used as an example in one of these
slide decks, perhaps I am misremembering.
At any rate, one option would be
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 5:43 PM, Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com wrote:
When the costs were minor, it was ok that the benefits were minor.
The costs will probably still be minor if we just let Rick look at it
and revise the proposal.
What has happened here is
- upon implementing the feature,
Yehuda Katz cited an acronym taught when he was a wee lad learning
algebra: PEMDAS (Parentheses, Exponentiation, Multiplication/Dviistion,
Addition/Subtraction). Who else learned this?
There's nothing sacrosanct about binary precedence being generally lower
than unary. Consider the property
I don't get it. The conflict between
* the history of ** in other languages,
* the general pattern that unary binds tighter than binary
seems unresolvable. By the first bullet, -2 ** 2 would be -4. By the
second, it would be 4. Either answer will surprise too many programmers. By
contrast, no
In 9.1.11. it's specified that the iterator returned by the [[Enumerate]]
method iterates over String-valued keys. But the informative definition at
the end of 9.1.11. is based on whatever is returned by calling
Reflect.enumerate on the prototype of the current object, assuming that
there is such
There's still the issue of exponentiation being right-associative. Unless **
becomes an operator which behaves differently as to how it would in a high
school maths class, we're at an impasse.
That said, ^ is usually the operator used for exponentiation outside
programming languages when you
Exponentiation is written in conventional mathematics as if it were a
postfix unary operator, parameterised by a value written in superscript.
IMO this puts it in a whole different class to binary operators where both
operands are written equally. I don't see a ** b ** c as a good reflection
of
On 08/26/2015 13:12, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
I think the better idea would be related to value types
(http://www.slideshare.net/BrendanEich/value-objects2) which brendan is working on for
ES7.
I fuzzily recall rounding modes being used as an example in one of these slide
decks, perhaps I am
See the following test262 test:
https://github.com/tc39/test262/blob/master/test/language/expressions/assignment/S11.13.1_A5_T5.js
(and related tests with update / compound assignment).
In short, it is possible to have a Reference to a global variable which has
been deleted. Normally, bare
Filed at https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4532
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Kevin Gibbons ke...@shapesecurity.com
wrote:
See the following test262 test:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Waldemar Horwat walde...@google.com
wrote:
On 08/26/2015 09:09, Mark S. Miller wrote:
I don't get it. The conflict between
* the history of ** in other languages,
* the general pattern that unary binds tighter than binary
seems unresolvable. By the first
On 08/26/2015 09:09, Mark S. Miller wrote:
I don't get it. The conflict between
* the history of ** in other languages,
* the general pattern that unary binds tighter than binary
seems unresolvable. By the first bullet, -2 ** 2 would be -4. By the second, it
would be 4. Either answer will
Alexander Jones schrieb:
Exponentiation is written in conventional mathematics as if it were a
postfix unary operator, parameterised by a value written in superscript.
IMO this puts it in a whole different class to binary operators where both
operands are written equally. I don't see a ** b ** c
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Kevin Gibbons ke...@shapesecurity.com
wrote:
See the following test262 test:
https://github.com/tc39/test262/blob/master/test/language/expressions/assignment/S11.13.1_A5_T5.js
(and related tests with update / compound assignment).
In short, it is possible to
Le 26 août 2015 à 00:43, Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com a écrit :
When the costs were minor, it was ok that the benefits were minor. Given
significant costs, we need to ask:
While I don't have a strong opinion about the cost of the proposed modified
grammar, I protest that the cost
I completely agree. My When the costs were minor refers to when we were
not yet aware of the conflict.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Claude Pache claude.pa...@gmail.com
wrote:
Le 26 août 2015 à 00:43, Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com a écrit :
When the costs were minor, it was ok that
Hello!
Would you consider providing intrinsic functions for directed rounding,
to encapsulate the corresponding features of IEE 754 floating point
computations (resp. the fesetround function of C99)? That would be
useful for mathematical applications, in particular when implementing
interval
`fesetround` would be a terrible way for JavaScript to implement this, as
it would allow a piece of code to affect the behavior of completely
unrelated pieces of code by screwing with global rounding mode bits.
That's not going to happen.
I believe there have been proposals to allow greater
On 8/3/15 8:15 PM, Glen Huang wrote:
Ideally, if the same resolve reject callback combination is passed more than
once, the same promise is always returned
That's a backwards-incompatible change from what browsers are shipping,
right?
(I can't think of a use case where promises could
On Aug 26, 2015, at 3:17 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Kevin Gibbons ke...@shapesecurity.com
wrote:
See the following test262 test:
https://github.com/tc39/test262/blob/master/test/language/expressions/assignment/S11.13.1_A5_T5.js
(and related tests with
On 08/26/2015 15:08, Mark S. Miller wrote:
The force of that precedent is indeed what my objection is. The yield counter-example
is interesting, but yield is an identifier not an operator symbol, and so does not as
clearly fall within or shape operator expectations.
If someone explains a
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
IMO promises should reject if they are cancelled. The same method that
gave you the Promise (for example, an AJAX API) can give you a capability
to cancel the Promise, ie cancel the pending network operation and reject
the Promise (rejecting is a no-op if the operation races with cancellation
and
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Waldemar Horwat walde...@google.com
wrote:
On 08/26/2015 15:08, Mark S. Miller wrote:
The force of that precedent is indeed what my objection is. The yield
counter-example is interesting, but yield is an identifier not an
operator symbol, and so does not as
Is there also perhaps a potential performance/static analysis benefit in
having it be syntax, rather than a builtin function? `Math.pow` can be
overwritten, and varies per-realm, but `**` can not and does not.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 8:21 PM, Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com wrote:
On Wed,
29 matches
Mail list logo
