Re: New full Unicode for ES6 idea

Glenn Adams wrote: On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 2:13 AM, Erik Corry > wrote: > level 3 is useful for higher level, language/locale sensitive text No, the Unicode grapheme clustering algorithm is not locale or language sensitive http://unicode.org/reports

Re: How about replacing <| with ->

I'm with Luke here. We shouldn't abuse a common idiom from other languages, including upstream ones such as CoffeeScript. Kris's suggestion of +> changed to deal with the "wrong direction" criticism (which I find compelling since the [[Prototype]] property is a reference): let sub = sup +<

Re: How about replacing <| with ->

> It's a matter of opinion. UML thinks that <| points is pointing in the > "right" direction (towards the more general object). I thought about the [[Prototype]] property pointing from the “prototypee” to the prototype. And of the way prototype (property lookup) chains go from prototypees to p

Re: Behaviour of DaylightSavingsTA in ES5.1 spec

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Norbert Lindenberg wrote: > "NOTE It is recommended that implementations use the time zone information of > the IANA Time Zone Database." I don't suppose there is any desire to embed the Olson / now IANA information, ala JRE, into engines rather than relying on th

RE: How about replacing <| with ->

> What do you think? Do you like -> better than <| ? Is it ok to not have > it available for some possible future function shorthand? >> >> Both => and -> have strong associations with function shorthands from C#, >> Scala, C++, Java 8, Perl, CoffeeScript, ML, Haskell and more. Whethe

Re: How about replacing <| with ->

On Mar 2, 2012, at 4:31 PM, Luke Hoban wrote: >>> What do you think? Do you like -> better than <| ? Is it ok to not have it >>> available for some possible future function shorthand? > > Both => and -> have strong associations with function shorthands from C#, > Scala, C++, Java 8, Perl, Co

Re: How about replacing <| with ->

On Mar 2, 2012, at 4:28 PM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote: > Sorry, I actually meant to ask a question: Isn’t the direction of -> wrong? It's a matter of opinion. UML thinks that <| points is pointing in the "right" direction (towards the more general object). However, a lot of people think about i

RE: How about replacing <| with ->

>> What do you think? Do you like -> better than <| ?  Is it ok to not have it >> available for some possible future function shorthand? Both => and -> have strong associations with function shorthands from C#, Scala, C++, Java 8, Perl, CoffeeScript, ML, Haskell and more. Whether or not JavaS

Re: Behaviour of DaylightSavingsTA in ES5.1 spec

Thanks, Luke, for bringing this up again and doing all the research! In the ECMAScript Internationalization API specification draft [1], which we expect to be implemented on top of libraries with good time zone support, we tried to address this issue. The description of the abstract operation T

Re: How about replacing <| with ->

Sorry, I actually meant to ask a question: Isn’t the direction of -> wrong? >> It was recently suggested to me that it is unlikely that we will ever adopt >> -> as as function expression shorthand symbol and that this means we could >> consider using that symbol sequence for other purposes. In

Behaviour of DaylightSavingsTA in ES5.1 spec

I raised some concerns about the current ES5.1 spec rules for daylight savings handling (15.9.1.8) with a few folks at recent TC39 f2f meetings. Norbert also raise similar concerns in reviewing issues related to globalization APIs, and in notes on internationalization issues with ES5 spec wordi

Re: How about replacing <| with ->

Thanks - This looks really nice! On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > with corrected link to wiki page: > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proto_operator#suggestion_to_replace_with > > > On Mar 2, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > > It was recently

Re: How about replacing <| with ->

with corrected link to wiki page: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proto_operator#suggestion_to_replace_with On Mar 2, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: It was recently suggested to me that it is unlikely that we will ever adopt -> as as function expression shorthand sy

Re: How about replacing <| with ->

Allen, that link brings me to the "About this wiki" page Rick On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote: > The direction is wrong. It’s what I like most about <| – that it’s > graphical, intuitive and indicates a direction. > > Is there a list of symbols that have already been reje

Re: How about replacing <| with ->

The direction is wrong. It’s what I like most about <| – that it’s graphical, intuitive and indicates a direction. Is there a list of symbols that have already been rejected? I still like <| best (better than a word such as beget or proto), followed by <~ and <: On Mar 2, 2012, at 23:30 , Allen

Re: How about replacing <| with ->

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > Some examples of this usage of -> include: > MyObject.prototype -> {a:1,b:2} > appArrayBehavior->[0,1,2,3,4,5] > let subclass = superclass -> function () {}; > var p = newRegExpMethods -> /[a-m][3-7]/ > What do you think? Do you li

How about replacing <| with ->

It was recently suggested to me that it is unlikely that we will ever adopt -> as as function expression shorthand symbol and that this means we could consider using that symbol sequence for other purposes. In particular, it would be a reasonable and possibly less controversial alternative to t

Re: New "ES6" draft

On Mar 2, 2012, at 1:55 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote: > On 2 March 2012 00:38, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: >> - Eliminated various static semantic rules that would be breaking changes in >> “one JavaScript” > > Can you give a brief overview of the class of rules that you had to abandon? > > Among o

Re: New full Unicode for ES6 idea

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 2:13 AM, Erik Corry wrote: > > level 3 is useful for higher level, language/locale sensitive text > > No, the Unicode grapheme clustering algorithm is not locale or > language sensitive > http://unicode.org/reports/tr29/#Grapheme_Cluster_Boundaries one final comment: the

Re: New full Unicode for ES6 idea

On Mar 1, 2012, at 11:09 PM, Norbert Lindenberg wrote: > Comments: > > 1) In terms of the prioritization I suggested a few days ago > https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2012-February/020721.html > it seems you're considering item 6 essential, item 1 a side effect (whose > consequenc

Re: New "ES6" draft

On 2 March 2012 00:38, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > - Eliminated various static semantic rules that would be breaking changes in > “one JavaScript” Can you give a brief overview of the class of rules that you had to abandon? Among other things, I'm wondering how that affects our existing implement

Re: New full Unicode for ES6 idea

2012/3/2 Glenn Adams : > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 12:58 AM, Erik Corry wrote: >> >> 2012/3/1 Glenn Adams : >> >> I'd like to plead for a solution rather like the one Java has, where >> >> strings are sequences of UTF-16 codes and there are specialized ways >> >> to iterate over them.  Looking at t

Re: New full Unicode for ES6 idea

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 12:58 AM, Erik Corry wrote: > 2012/3/1 Glenn Adams : > >> I'd like to plead for a solution rather like the one Java has, where > >> strings are sequences of UTF-16 codes and there are specialized ways > >> to iterate over them. Looking at this entry from the Unicode FAQ: >