Thank you.... Did why didn't he say so instead of crying out to a mod? Are you a mod?
E-S4L N-S4L > On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:47 PM, "John Barton" <johnjbar...@google.com> wrote: > > You can find lots of information about design discussions by reading the > ecmascript wiki, for example: > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proxies. The other good > resource is the past posts to this list and the meeting minutes, > http://esdiscuss.org/. > > In general, the content that is painstakingly written down in the ES6 > specification has been designed and discussed in great detail. The > appropriate level of comments on those features needs to be equally detailed > and thoughtful. > Random comments about how you personally don't like some aspects of the > design are better directed to your followers on twitter or perhaps a blog > post. And of course you are free not to use any new features you dislike. I > believe that is what Alex was attempting to communicate. > > jjb > > >> On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:25 PM, L2L 2L <emanuelal...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> Anyone care to justify the use case for the proxy object? >> >> Yes I understand it'll let us defined the behavior of an object. But >> couldn't that be a method for the Object constructor? >> >> E-S4L >> N-S4L >> >>> On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:55 PM, "L2L 2L" <emanuelal...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Huh? ... Should I be doing so? ... Huh? >>> >>> E-S4L >>> N-S4L >>> >>>> On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:54 PM, "Alex Russell" <slightly...@google.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> 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 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
