So far, we've been trying to primarily track changes relative to the original
ES3 spec. and that is how we intend to release next week's version. However,
we can probably create you a version that shows the delta's relative to the
June 11 version if that would be helpful. I think after next
Lars,
The revision history that I am maintaining at the end of the document is the
closest to a change log at the moment; it calls out the changes made between
the 11 June draft and this one.
Just as a heads-up you should expect to see more changes between now and the
next draft that we hope
Since we are discussing 'with' in particular - it may be difficult to tighten
spec language to fix 'with', but I do believe that if there is some way in
which we can deprecate/ban 'with' we should consider it.
For e.g. 'with' interacts with other language features in surprising ways.
Consider
Back to list -
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Brendan Eich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2008, at 6:51 AM, Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK) wrote:
The side effect is as follows: if this does not have a length
property, it ends up getting one; if this does have a length
property, but is not
to list -
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Brendan Eich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2008, at 2:07 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
A program that called pop() on an object w/no length would know right
away if it failed.
Why do you say that?
I worded that very poorly. It was in response
In your comments on the June 11, ES3.1 draft you said:
p22 7.8. Unacceptable change: The requirement to signal regular
expression syntax errors at scanning time breaks existing programs.
(The justification (since the arguments are the same every tine[sic],
... appears to have no bearing on
On Jun 27, 2008, at 3:45 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
to list -
I am not the one replying to sender only -- all of my replies to you
have cc'ed the list. You have replied twice to me only, then resent
as reply-alls. What mailer are you using?
Again, we don't know what failing faster (you
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Brendan Eich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2008, at 3:45 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
to list -
I am not the one replying to sender only -- all of my replies to you have
cc'ed the list.
I know. I had a mistake and hit 'Reply'. Then, realizing that, I put
On Jun 27, 2008, at 10:18 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
What is a green-field design exercise?
Sorry for the confusing phrase -- I should have written it's not a
clean-slate design opportunity.
/be
___
Es4-discuss mailing list
Es4-discuss@mozilla.org
