Can anyone enlighten me as to how any input on features that are rushed into
the standard works?
What is the purpose of hosting TC39 on GitHub if no input is expected from
anybody but TC39 members?
Prime example: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-import-meta/issues/2
Somehow it’s already in
I’ll reply to several emails with one, so as not to spread more-or-less similar
texts over multiple small emails.
> whatwg/loader was too big of a spec. It was floated around in various forms
>for at least 5 years. Despite the very hard work of its champions it didn't
>garner enough
, body { word-wrap: break-word !important; }
Because it's been reserved syntax since JavaScript's inception, and System
hasn't.
I'd recommend some light reading before attempting to continue arguing:
https://mathiasbynens.be/notes/reserved-keywords
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Dmitrii Dima
an't be made syntax, because `var System = {};` is valid code, and we can't
break the web. (seriously)
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 12:31 AM, Dmitrii Dimandt
<
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
>
wrote:
Make “System” syntax, and there you go.
Instead we have multiple ad-hoc random additions to ra
's inception, and System
hasn't.
I'd recommend some light reading before attempting to continue arguing:
https://mathiasbynens.be/notes/reserved-keywords
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Dmitrii Dimandt
<
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
>
wrote:
But you can’t `var x = import`, for example. I gu
or would have thrown a ReferenceError or TypeError. Adding `Symbol` won't break
any of that code (because the code that threw was already broken).
On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Dmitrii Dimandt
<
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
>
wrote:
> [Reflect] Not a breaking change because addin
lds:
```js
console.log(#dirname);
```
- Matthew Robb
On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Dmitrii Dimandt
<
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
>
wrote:
Too bad emails don’t have "thumbs up" and “+1”s :) So here’s my "+1” to you
On Sat, 05 Aug 2017 at 18:28 "T.J. Crowder"
Languages *evolve*. It means that at some point something will be introduced
that may break existing user code.
I understand that with JS the problem is compounded a billion-fold (JS is used
quite literally everywhere).
However: Looking at the evolution of JS we can see that new entities and
}
On Aug 5, 2017 11:59 AM, "Dmitrii Dimandt" <
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
> wrote:
Import is already made to be a context-sensitive keyword
I don’t think you can have a
function x() {
import {x} from ‘module’;
}
On Sat, 05 Aug 2017 at 13:07 "T.J. Crowder"
<
's the exact same context-specific behavior as `yield` and they are both tied
to generator functions. How is that in any way unexpected?
On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Dmitrii Dimandt
<
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
>
wrote:
I just realised that there is also the argument that “global ob
.
On Aug 5, 2017 12:08 PM, "Dmitrii Dimandt" <
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
> wrote:
That’s not what I was really aiming at :)
The original concern was “to get ‘module’ : 1. It's a context-sensitive
keyword, and code that's using it needs to
be updated when migrated to a m
Too bad emails don’t have "thumbs up" and “+1”s :) So here’s my "+1” to you
On Sat, 05 Aug 2017 at 18:28 "T.J. Crowder"
<
mailto:
> wrote:
a, pre, code, a:link, body { word-wrap: break-word !important; }
On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Dmitrii Dimandt
<
m
x.
It would be interesting to explore using the same syntax for module scoped
private fields:
```js
console.log(#dirname);
```
- Matthew Robb
On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Dmitrii Dimandt
<
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
>
wrote:
Too bad emails don’t have "thumbs up" and “+1”s
one (including the new global in ES6),
or would have thrown a ReferenceError or TypeError. Adding `Symbol` won't break
any of that code (because the code that threw was already broken).
On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Dmitrii Dimandt
<
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
>
wrote:
> [Refl
Aug 4, 2017 at 1:09 AM Dmitrii Dimandt <
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
> wrote:
Let’s continue with the trend of light reading. Let’s see the multitude of
things that are in JS, and no one bats an eye:
— start quote —
Note that
implements
,
let
,
private
,
public
,
inte
t.
On Aug 4, 2017 8:45 AM, "Dmitrii Dimandt" <
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
> wrote:
Sorry, it’s just the manner in which Javascript is being actively demolished
has really irked me. Especially the speed with which these decisions are
carried out. Suggestions like “you should
Exactly! import.meta doesn’t make import an object. new.target doesn’t make new
an object. function.sent doesn’t make function an object.
These are just purely arbitrary things tacked on top of randomly selected
keywords because at one point someone needed some *introspection* info (such as
Import is already made to be a context-sensitive keyword
I don’t think you can have a
function x() {
import {x} from ‘module’;
}
On Sat, 05 Aug 2017 at 13:07 "T.J. Crowder"
<
mailto:
> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Naveen Chawla
<
mailto:naveen.c...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
>
/caridy
On Aug 4, 2017, at 3:31 AM, Dmitrii Dimandt <
mailto:dmit...@dmitriid.com
> wrote:
Make “System” syntax, and there you go.
Instead we have multiple ad-hoc random additions to random keywords just
because someone needs something and since there are rarely any long-term design
19 matches
Mail list logo
