Re: i18n testing issue

2013-02-06 Thread Norbert Lindenberg
On Feb 6, 2013, at 12:14 , Nebojša Ćirić wrote: > Does the test: > intl402/ch11/11.3/11.3.2_1_a_ii.js This tests the behavior of the function returned by Intl.NumberFormat.prototype.format with various values for the "value" argument. We'd like the argument to be a number. The normal pattern f

Re: A new function name property proposal

2013-02-06 Thread Brendan Eich
Updating this thread. I need to update the wiki still, but at last week's TC39 meeting we did agree to infer name mostly as you proposed. The one change of note is to make f.name writable always. BTW, I just noticed that SpiderMonkey infers a "display id" now, along the lines of your proposal:

Re: Refutable pattern

2013-02-06 Thread Brendan Eich
Oliver Hunt wrote: On Feb 5, 2013, at 11:00 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: Sorry if I was a thread-killer, posting four times in a row. On balance we have: prefix-? pros: * LR(1) grammar without ambiguity or lookahead restriction. What's the production that takes this out of LL(1)? Nothing -- I

i18n testing issue

2013-02-06 Thread Nebojša Ćirić
Does the test: intl402/ch11/11.3/11.3.2_1_a_ii.js has a conflict with: intl402/ch13/13.2/13.2.1_1.js One expects support for format(undefined) while the other expects an TypeError. Also, where in the spec (I was looking at the NumberFormat abstract method) do we deal with input type? It just say

Re: Refutable pattern

2013-02-06 Thread Oliver Hunt
On Feb 5, 2013, at 11:00 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: > Sorry if I was a thread-killer, posting four times in a row. > > On balance we have: > > prefix-? pros: > * LR(1) grammar without ambiguity or lookahead restriction. What's the production that takes this out of LL(1)? > > prefix-? cons: > *