The recent thread about specifications and meta-circularity devolved
into a discussion about semantics. Before one can argue whether or
not the standards committee should invest effort in helping out (much
less incorporating) a semantics, it helps to understand what form a
*useful* semantics can
2010/5/21 Shriram Krishnamurthi s...@cs.brown.edu:
The recent thread about specifications and meta-circularity devolved
into a discussion about semantics. Before one can argue whether or
not the standards committee should invest effort in helping out (much
less incorporating) a semantics, it
-Original Message-
From: es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org [mailto:es-discuss-
boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Mike Samuel
...
David Herman argued that overspecification is a problem in some parts of the
spec and cited Array.prototype.sort.
In building your semantics, were there parts
In building your semantics, were there parts of the spec that stood
out as under-specified that could benefit from being described via \JS
or desugar?
I don't have a good answer to this question. The paper by Maffeis,
Mitchell, and Taly catalogs some of these cases. We had the same
problems
4 matches
Mail list logo
