I would be more than happy to go on with libraries first approach as long
as we don't have to wait 6 years before a needed feature is going to be
considered.
I have also raised the problem because it is in my opinion underestimated
but mainly because I would like to avoid the fragmentation of
Le 09/01/2012 06:29, Brendan Eich a écrit :
On Jan 8, 2012, at 7:20 PM, John J Barton wrote:
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com
mailto:bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
Firebug uses a library bind a lot, and we continually struggled
with the memoization
On 6 January 2012 03:37, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
Here is a possible set of rules for implicitly assigning ES5 or ES6 semantics
to a Program unit
In an ES6 implementation, all constructs that can occur in a valid program
fit into one of these categories:
ES6-only:
Hi,
I have looked at the links and as I understand they are trying to accomplish
something slightly different, by adopting code as kind of data, though it is
interesting, too (and your are true do-expressions do it elegantly, except
for the explicit zero-arg lambda thing (I think || is not
Le 08/01/2012 19:47, John J Barton a écrit :
(...)
window.addEventListener('load', boundOnLoad, false);
...
window.removeEventListener('load', boundOnLoad, false);
The JS method 1) must be bound to the correct object 2) be
reference-able for the removeEventListener.
This combination
indeed ... inline functions are problem number 2, anonymous or not, unless
the removeEventListener is not performed inside the function itself so that
at least the function name could be reused while if anonymous and use
strict is in place there's no way to know which function is it.
However, two
On Jan 9, 2012, at 2:49 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
On 5 January 2012 20:10, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Jan 5, 2012, at 6:31 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
Sorry, I still think that a growing set of subtle implicit rules for
activating subtle semantic changes
Not changes, new
On Jan 9, 2012, at 7:54 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:
The question is how bad these will be for anyone writing JS naively, based on
current and emerging (ES6) docs, without explicit opt-in.
The answer entails at least:
1. ES5-strict semantic changes, e.g. arguments aliasing, without early
On Jan 9, 2012, at 12:29 AM, David Bruant wrote:
Le 09/01/2012 06:29, Brendan Eich a écrit :
On Jan 8, 2012, at 7:20 PM, John J Barton wrote:
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
Firebug uses a library bind a lot, and we continually struggled with the
On 9 January 2012 16:54, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
The question is how bad these will be for anyone writing JS naively, based on
current and emerging (ES6) docs, without explicit opt-in.
The answer entails at least:
1. ES5-strict semantic changes, e.g. arguments aliasing,
On Jan 8, 2012, at 9:26 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
On Jan 8, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
[...]
All cool with the above. Thanks.
I wrote in a previous reply that we aren't preserving ES5 as a spec
On Jan 9, 2012, at 2:59 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
I think the state machine is over-complicating things. What it boils
down to is that we are defining a new language, ES6-proper (or
informally ES6 for short). It overlaps with ES5 but does not include
it (e.g. throws out `with'). Then your
On Jan 8, 2012, at 10:32 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:
On Jan 8, 2012, at 8:28 AM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
...
The other change I hope fits into the same bucket is
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:fixing_override_mistake.
Right now, because of pressure from test262, we are in
FTR (a broken record, sorry), I think we will do a big disservice to
interoperation in practice (as enjoyed by future web devs) if we essentially
fork the spec and mutate one copy (even excluding Clause 15) to be ES6.
I'm still pretty sure implementations will not fork their non-library
just to make it more concrete for those interested:
http://webreflection.blogspot.com/2012/01/introducing-objecthandler.html
IDL Like description and code ... to me this is a much faster/easier/better
solution than Function#bind ... unshimmable for IE 9 but ... you know,
some wrapper could do
15 matches
Mail list logo
