On Mar 5, 2009, at 10:20 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
The NOTE following toUpperCase (15.5.4.18) says:
NOTE
Because both toUpperCase and toLowerCase have context-sensitive
behaviour, the functions are not symmetrical. In other words,
s.toUpperCase().toLowerCase() is not necessarily equal to
On Mar 5, 2009, at 9:26 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
In their code generation scheme, do they ever require the generated
function to have a particular non-global scope, or will global
scope do?
Are you really talking about "scopes" in the formal language sense
here?
Yes -- does Objective
>-Original Message-
>From: es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org [mailto:es-discuss-
>boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of James Graham
...
>A further question concerns characters with context-sensitive case
>mappings. Are implementations expected to apply the context-sensitive
>case transformation o
A number of questions/comments below
>-Original Message-
>From: Brendan Eich
>Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 5:40 PM
>Subject: Re: name property for built-in functions??
>
>On Mar 5, 2009, at 5:34 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
>> The authors of Objective-J and the Capuccino framework have
On Mar 5, 2009, at 5:34 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
The authors of Objective-J and the Capuccino framework have asked us
to either make Function.name mutable or else provide a way to
construct a function with a provided name. Since they use language
translation, they would like the debugge
On Mar 4, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
On Mar 4, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Jeff Watkins wrote:
Can I suggest that allowing writing to name may be helpful when
creating transparent wrapper functions?
We do a lot of this:
function wrapWithChangeNotification(key, fn)
{
return functi
On Mar 3, 2009, at 8:01 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
I like most of what you just proposed, except that I find it
surprising that a function's ".name" is not the identifier used by
".toString()" on that function. This same issue just came up on an
internal list at Google: Objecting that since
Thanks,
Both Crock and I agree with you, so I'll add this to the Errata
9.a should be:
a. If value is finite then return ToString(value).
Allen
>-Original Message-
>From: es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org [mailto:es-discuss-
>boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Robert Sayre
>Sent: Thursda
In describing the abstract operation Str(key, holder), the spec says
9. If Type(value) is number
a. If value is finite then return value.
b. else, return "null"
Perhaps I am misreading, but this looks like a bug to me, since Str
should return a string.
--
Robert Sayre
"I would have writte
get and set aren't reserved, they are only used contextually as keywords within
object literals
use also isn't reserved and is only recognized as a keyword within a string
literal that forms a use strict directive, see 14.1
let and yield aren't reserved but the NOTE at the end of 7.5.3 warns th
Hello,
I have some feedback on the March 2nd draft.
Sections 7.5.2, 7.5.3. It looks like there are some keywords missing
from the lists:
get, set, let, yield, use
--
Michael
___
Es-discuss mailing list
Es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/
11 matches
Mail list logo
