Is there seriously going to be no attempt whatsoever to moderate this list?
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:42 AM, L2L 2L <emanuelal...@hotmail.com> wrote: > ... This language is turning note in an application than a programming > language. > > It could of been a commonjs thing... Long live ES5+. > > I like the let, and const syntax add on. Foo feature and fits into the > language. > > Yes ai agree they should release as CSS is releasing. > > E-S4L > N-S4L > > > On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <he...@mailbox.sk> wrote: > > > > > > > > L2L 2L wrote: > >> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community > > > > Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-) > > And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list > thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left > ignored. > > > > Nevertheless: > > > >> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to > >> get what they want in the language. > >> > >> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and > >> what else to come. > >> > >> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help > >> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better > >> what's already there. > >> > >> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E > >> > >> As long as one can write compliant ES5. > >> > >> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning > >> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as > >> the let and const statement plus other +. > >> > >> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually > >> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4. > >> > >> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like > >> commonjs add on. > > > > I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in > not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according to > which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013. > > > > Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from > what I see. > > > > I got delusioned as well. > > > > Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live > now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light > when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be > changed so that: > > > > - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule; > > - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in > 2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let, const, > Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly block > scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are already > near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super inconsistency), no > symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions, no > promises); > > - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example, > for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a > single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises; > > ... etc. > > Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes, > proxies). > > > > This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next > and actually start developing in it. > > > > Thanks, Herby > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
