On Jul 26, 2008, at 4:03 AM, Ingvar von Schoultz wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ingvar von Schoultz wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to keep the language relatively simple.
You can't get away from supporting this:
{
function a(){}
var b = a;
}
What do
Igor Bukanov wrote:
2008/7/26 Ingvar von Schoultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Do you really think {{ }} appears in existing code, correctly
enclosing statement blocks, with the {{ and the }} placed tightly
together both at the beginning and at the end?
Yes: I have seen the code like
if (x) {
Brendan Eich wrote:
Waldemar meant precisely what he wrote: ES3 and draft ES3.1 -- the
specifications, not random JS implementations.
Oops, I got lost in details and strayed far away from the
point that I wanted to make. In fact I should have said
this from the beginning:
You can't get away
2008/7/26 Ingvar von Schoultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think all of these would be unambiguous:
{. code .}
{. not work since {.0; } is a valid ES3
{: code :}
{| code |}
These 2 cases are indeed invalid ES3.
{[ code ]}
[[ code ]]
[ code ]
Any of this can be a valid
On Jul 26, 2008, at 2:07 PM, Ingvar von Schoultz wrote:
You can't get away from supporting this:
{
function a(){}
var b = a;
}
ES4 is planning to support function declarations locally
bound in blocks, so the above is valid ES4 code.
What you see above is
On Jul 26, 2008, at 2:06 PM, Ingvar von Schoultz wrote:
How sad! It seemed such a simple and intuitive notation!
Opinions vary, but all the ones I heard at the Ecma TC39 meeting
found it neither simple nor intuitive, and some abhorred it on
aesthetic grounds to boot.
I think all of these
Sorry about the length of this, but I'm trying to cover the
unclear things, and often I don't know which things are unclear.
Brendan Eich wrote:
On Jul 26, 2008, at 2:07 PM, Ingvar von Schoultz wrote:
You can't get away from supporting this:
{
function a(){}
var
