right, that's nice, just wonder if at that time to pass an object will be
slightly ambiguous
function fn({a: a = {}, b: b = true}) { ... }
fn(genericObject) will fail as first argument so that
fn({a: genericObject}) will be necessary
If these things are optimized on engine levels then who
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com wrote:
[...] Regarding infinite extensible
objects, the only problem I see off the top of my head is: What would
Object.getOwnPropertyNames return?
Hmm. I wonder if this is a problem even for finite objects.
js var x = [];
js
Le 19/09/2011 09:32, Jason Orendorff a écrit :
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Mark S. Millererig...@google.com wrote:
[...] Regarding infinite extensible
objects, the only problem I see off the top of my head is: What would
Object.getOwnPropertyNames return?
Hmm. I wonder if this is a
Or is ECMAScript.next still the better term?
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
It appears that ES6 is ok: http://www.slideshare.net/BrendanEich/capitol-js
Rick
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de wrote:
Or is ECMAScript.next still the better term?
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
I'd recommend sticking sticking with ES.next as much as possible. Everything
is still subject to change and there remains a lot of opportunity for creating
confusion by talking about what is in ES6.
Allen
On Sep 19, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Rick Waldron wrote:
It appears that ES6 is ok:
This is an auto-replied message.
I will be out of the office Starting on Monday Sept 19th through Friday Oct
10th, 2011 on vacation. I will no access to e-mail and voice mail and will
answer urgent e-mails that same day. If this a technical issue please contact
Matt
On Sep 19, 2011, at 2:36 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
I'd recommend sticking sticking with ES.next as much as possible.
Everything is still subject to change and there remains a lot of opportunity
for creating confusion by talking about what is in ES6.
ES.next started to grate, for several
On Sep 19, 2011, at 3:05 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
You're right that the safer course is ES.next until we're further along. When
is further along in your view?
One approach is to not describe a features as being in ES6 until after it
first appears in an actual ES6 draft. From that
I think further along occurs when we have made final decisions on what is
in and what is not, because not starts to become ES-Next, What I
would be afraid of is that ES-6 is over populated with want-a-be's
features and starts to get a life of its own (remember our experience with
ES-3.1
10 matches
Mail list logo
