On Feb 14, 2014, at 1:34 AM, Mathias Bynens wrote: > Allen mentioned that `String#at` might not make it to ES6 because nobody in > TC39 is championing it. I’ve now asked Rick if he would be the champion for > this, and he agreed. (Thanks again!) > > Looking over the ‘TC39 progress’ document at > <https://docs.google.com/a/chromium.org/document/d/1QbEE0BsO4lvl7NFTn5WXWeiEIBfaVUF7Dk0hpPpPDzU>, > it seems most of the work is already taken care of: the use case was > discussed in this thread, the proposal has a complete spec text, and there’s > an example implementation/polyfill with unit tests. See <http://mths.be/at>. > > Is there anything else I can do to help get this included as a > non-TC39-member? >
But just to be even clear, the new feature gate for ES6 is officially closed. It's a really high bar to get over that closed gate. Unless the exclusion of a feature was a mistake, fixes a bug, or is somehow essentially to supporting something that is already in ES6 I don't think we should be talking about adding it to ES6. I don't think String.prototype.at fits any of those criteria. We've talked about it several times, including in the context of Norbert's original ES6 full unicode support proposal, and never achieved consensus on including it. Personally, I think it should be there but it's time to start talking about it for ES7 not ES6. Allen _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
