On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:07 PM, Kevin Smith zenpars...@gmail.com wrote:
Hopefully I’m wrong in that Foo.call(this) is illegal, but if it is, this is
a devastating change, especially when traits are scheduled for ES7 or later.
Class constructors will now throw when called.
The changes to
I know traits are not something that will make it into ES6. This was the
suggested alternative on the mailing list:
class Thing extends mixin(Base, Trait1, Trait2) {...}
Unfortuantly since rev32 this is now seems impossible, as a custom
implementation of traits would need to this to work:
I know that this is a small nit and that it’s probably too late, but: Shouldn’t
public symbols (`Symbol.iterator` etc.) have all-uppercase property names? It
would indicate that they are constants and it would visually set them apart
from other stuff that is in `Symbol` (`Symbol.for()` etc.).
Hopefully I’m wrong in that Foo.call(this) is illegal, but if it is, this
is a devastating change, especially when traits are scheduled for ES7 or
later.
Class constructors will now throw when called.
The changes to classes were fundamental but necessary to support
subclassing of builtins
I could not find an answer in the specification regarding the following
cases:
import './foo/index.js'
import 'foo/index.js'
import 'foo/index'
import 'foo'
import 'foo/'
Is there a difference?
Node.js lets create an 'index.js' file, which indicates the main include
file for a directory.
So if
```js
import './foo/index.js';
import 'foo/index.js';
import 'foo/index';
import 'foo';
import 'foo/‘;
```
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
I think you're missing the point Leon is trying to make. He's saying that,
in ES 6 we have a new way to write strings. In some ways, these more
powerful strings may condition some people to use ` as their main string
delimiter. An unsuspecting person may liken this to PHP's double quotes vs
I believe this is out the scope of ecmascript. It’s up to the host to determine
how the paths are resolved.
See
https://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-hostnormalizemodulename
https://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-hostnormalizemodulename
On Feb 5, 2015,
The following solution has worked very well for us:
import './foo/index.js';
means resolve './foo/index.js' relative to the importing file.
All of the rest mean look up 'foo' in the developer's mapping of names,
replacing 'foo' with a path that is then used to resolve the import.
To be sure
On Feb 5, 2015, at 7:24 AM, Alex Kocharin wrote:
Why is there two of them, not one?
It was my invention, so take this as definitive...
In 2008 (or maybe 7) when we were came up with the strings for mode directives
idea, there was no obvious preference among JS programmers in their use of
On 02/05/2015 05:12 AM, Andy Earnshaw wrote:
I think you're missing the point Leon is trying to make. He's saying
that, in ES 6 we have a new way to write strings. In some ways, these
more powerful strings may condition some people to use ` as their main
string delimiter. An unsuspecting
Also: given that modules are implicitly strict, you will hardly ever use the
strict directive in ES6.
On 05 Feb 2015, at 20:20, Steve Fink sph...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/05/2015 05:12 AM, Andy Earnshaw wrote:
I think you're missing the point Leon is trying to make. He's saying that,
in ES
Why is there two of them, not one? 05.02.2015, 18:06, "Frankie Bagnardi" f.bagna...@gmail.com:I think any issues with that are imagined. Languages have rules, and of the people who both know what 'use strict' does and are using es6 syntax, they're very unlikely to make the mistake. I don't see
I think any issues with that are imagined. Languages have rules, and of
the people who both know what 'use strict' does and are using es6 syntax,
they're very unlikely to make the mistake.
I don't see people using template literals for arbitrary strings... it
could happen but it probably won't.
On 5 Feb 2015, at 11:04, Leon Arnott leonarn...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, that isn't quite the full story - if it were just a case of pragmas
having to use something, anything, that could pass ES3 engines, then there
wouldn't necessarily be two otherwise-redundant forms of the syntax - `use
Well, that isn't quite the full story - if it were just a case of pragmas
having to use something, anything, that could pass ES3 engines, then there
wouldn't necessarily be two otherwise-redundant forms of the syntax - `use
strict` and `'use strict'`. The reason those exist is to save the author
On 5 Feb 2015 15:06, Frankie Bagnardi f.bagna...@gmail.com wrote:
I think any issues with that are imagined. Languages have rules, and of
the people who both know what 'use strict' does and are using es6 syntax,
they're very unlikely to make the mistake.
Sure, it's theoretical at this point
# January 29 2015 Meeting Notes
Brian Terlson (BT), Jonathan Turner (JT), Allen Wirfs-Brock (AWB), John
Neumann (JN), Jeff Morrison (JM), Erik Arvidsson (EA), Dave Herman (DH),
Waldemar Horwat (WH), Domenic Denicola (DD), Kevin Smith (KS), Michael
Ficarra (MF), Jordan Harband (JHD), Chip
# January 28 2015 Meeting Notes
Brian Terlson (BT), Jonathan Turner (JT), Allen Wirfs-Brock (AWB), John
Neumann (JN), Rick Waldron (RW), Jeff Morrison (JM), Erik Arvidsson (EA),
Peter Jensen (PJ), Yehuda Katz (YK), Dave Herman (DH), Waldemar Horwat
(WH), Dmitry Lomov (DL), Domenic Denicola (DD),
# January 27 2015 Meeting Notes
Brian Terlson (BT), Jonathan Turner (JT), Jordan Harband (JHD), Allen
Wirfs-Brock (AWB), John Neumann (JN), Rick Waldron (RW), Eric Ferraiuolo
(EF), Jeff Morrison (JM), Sebastian Markbage (SM), Erik Arvidsson (EA),
Peter Jensen (PJ), Yehuda Katz (YK), Dave Herman
20 matches
Mail list logo
