Anyone have ideas on more examples? It’s tempting to make a transpiler
plugin to see how it works in practice, but I’d like to see more examples
first. Thanks
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 1:12 PM Jacob Bloom
wrote:
> Maybe it would be less footgunny to support autovivification in a more
> class-based
ibreJS looks like a browser extension, not a JS engine...
> >
> > Aside, wow, I'm in favor of open-source, but this one is pretty out
> there.
> >
> > --
> > Michael J. Ryan - http://tracker1.info
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 11:11 AM Joe Eag
LibreJS? The FSF is seriously escalating the plugin/scripting issue?
Joe
On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 4:07 PM, J Decker wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Andrea Giammarchi <
> andrea.giammar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I guess when it comes to other projects Wi
CO in
generator bodies?)
Specifically, I'm referring to step 5 in IsInTailPosition that returns
false (
http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0/index.html#sec-isintailposition)
if the body is a generator body.
Thanks!
Joe P
___
es-discuss maili
@JoePea, that is one of the syntaxes I recommend in the proposal.
@michalwadas The primary goal of this I think is to create a standard feature,
but I do not see why an expression wrapped in parenthesis ultimately resulting
in an error class would not be supported.
Example:
...
} catch (awai
Ah, that does somewhat throw a wrench in the system. I'm not sure what the
committee's policy is on backwards compatibility and non-standard features. I
find the SpiderMonkey handling you just brought to my attention to be a little
clunky.
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 13, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Cl
this).
Still, even they would be better than nothing.
Cheers,
Joe
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 1:45 PM, David Bruant wrote:
> Le 01/12/2015 20:20, Michał Wadas a écrit :
>>
>>
>> As we all know, JavaScript as language lacks builtin randomness related
>> utilities.
>
Didn't send to list, something is wrong with my reply all. Sorry about
that. Stupid mobile gmail.
-- Forwarded message --
From: "joe"
Date: Sep 8, 2015 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: Object id, hash, etc?
To: "Garrett Smith"
Cc:
I agree with this request. This
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Alexander Jones wrote:
> Ethan is making my point far better than I did, and I agree completely about
> the issue of unary operators visually appearing more tightly bound than
> binary operators.
>
> At this point it seems fair to at least acknowledge the prospect
Do you know *why* python gets away with that, though? It forcibly
amortizes the GC cost by using a hybrid reference counting/cyclic
collector scheme. That's not exactly fast, either, which is why no
one else does it.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 201
doesn’t matter 99% of the time
> anyways, you probably aren’t going to rewrite a 1-liner into a huge switch
> statement or unreadable set of ternary expressions just to avoid that cost.
>
> I’m quite sure someone will point out how wrong I am on any or all of the
> above points any
sharing my experience with this
feature, since I do use it a lot. I recently implemented ES6 modules
as a little require.js loader plugin (it only transpiles the module
syntax, since Chrome now has most everything else in ES6), perhaps
I'll write a little plugin for this, too. Then I can us
.
Instead of saying "the VMs probably will. . ." perhaps the TC39 committee
should *mandate* that they do so formally, in the spec. Then people like
me could stop violating bits of the standard that aren't workable with how
today's VMs work, like the return value of .next meth
an existential
assignment operator might be a different matter (I've not thought it
through, though).
Best,
Joe
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Fabrício Matté wrote:
> What you've described seems very similar to PHP's static variables
> <http://php.net
d lib variadic function, I suppose:
if (select(a, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)) {
}
Cheers,
Joe
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:09 AM, wrote:
> Thanks I'll be searching through archive, and yea i think this is
> something very simple and yet innovative.
>
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 3:55 AM, Pe
n't need hackish language extensions such as this.
What do people think? Too many normative problems?
Best,
Joe
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
it's time browsers supported ProtoBufs/STRUCT
type systems natively.
Joe
On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Morningstar, Chip
wrote:
> I confess I don't see the point of this proposal at all, at least with
> respect to being specifically about JSON.
>
> JSON parsing/stringifi
JSON parsing is such a slow process that it motivated me to re-invent
Google Protobufs (in a nice, JS-friendly way, see
https://github.com/joeedh/STRUCT/wiki/Intro-and-Examples ). I never use
JSON in production code for this reason. An async api isn't a bad idea.
Joe
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015
still
relatively undeveloped.
Joe
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Soni L. wrote:
> Could add f{} as sugar for f({}), and make engines optimize f{}? (no
> positional arguments though)
>
> On 31/07/15 12:00 PM, Michał Wadas wrote:
>
> Proposal that do not conflict with minimifier
[sorry forgot to reply to all]
-- Forwarded message --
From: "joe"
Date: Jun 25, 2015 5:34 PM
Subject: Re: insteadof operator
To: "Bergi"
Cc:
Would there be any security issues? Also, runtime or lexical scope?
I've actually wanted this feature for
er() late. Oh man. When I started
seeing suff like:
Bleh.prototype.bleh.call(this)
Replaced with:
super.bleh();
I thought I would jump for joy.
Anyway, I'm incredibly grateful to the TC39 committed for their work.
Thanks,
Joe
P.S.
. . .If a mailing list must have noise a well as s
). At least I find it helpful.
However, it did require Yet Another Cover Grammar, so I dunno if it's
appropriate here.
Best,
Joe
On Jun 8, 2015 9:19 PM, "Luke Scott" wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I wanted to share some ideas with you for type hinting:
>
> https://github
Hay, I've not read all of the spec, and I've implemented much of it. :P
Joe
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
> Not all browsers have implemented the spec yet. But you should read the
> spec before proposing changes to it!
>
>
>
> *From
dof interesting; figuring out how to
parse RE literals wasn't easy (it's not strictly possible to parse them
with a RE tokenizer, but I managed to hackishly make it work).
Joe
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Park, Daejun wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any parser for ES6? It
Replies interspersed below
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:48 AM, James Burke wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
>
>> Indeed, there is no built-in facility for bundling since as explained
>> in this thread that will actually slow down your performance, and there’s
>> n
What I do is send the files over in as TAR archives, with mod_deflate
turned on (they basically turn into .tar.gz files at that point). It's
reasonably fast, even though I'm processing thirty megabytes of data this
way (yay for typed arrays). I highly recommend it.
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 7:57
That looks workable. Does anyone have any more comments on '.?' versus
'?.' ?
Joe
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Sebastian McKenzie wrote:
> No, you’d just memoise it to a variable:
>
> a?.d().f?.b
>
> to:
>
> var _temp, _temp2;
> (a != unde
}
q0eILlfx7_3(a);
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
> joe wrote:
>
>> That's a good point. Are lexical non-DFA grammars allowed? It would be
>> trivial to solve that with a regular expression lookahead. Although I
>> suppose at tha
That's a good point. Are lexical non-DFA grammars allowed? It would be
trivial to solve that with a regular expression lookahead. Although I
suppose at that point you might as well call it a cover grammar.
Joe
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
> joe wrote:
>
&g
Regardless of what the spec says, you cannot avoid singleton iterators in
real-world code. In my opinion, the spec should refrain from specifying
when object creation happens within the iteration protocol, wait for the
relevant code and contract patterns to develop and then include something
in ES
this is a very simple use case. Supporting e.g. function calls
would require more tokens (which raises the question: why stop at '.'?
Should we have arithmetic versions too?). Given the proliferation of
binary operator tokens in JS, I'm not sure if this is a good thing.
Joe
On
I hacked together something similar myself. IIRC, this particular
transformation has issues with nested operators (e.g. a.b?.c.d?.e.f?.h).
Of course that's an implementation detail, but the problem (if I'm
remembering it right) is that people couldn't figure out what the
implementation constraints
n
its async libraries.
Joe
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Boopathi Rajaa
> wrote:
> > Why do we have both?
>
> Why do we have both values and arrays, not just the latter?
>
>
>
ed feature.
It's not terribly important to me since I seem to average one use case of
multiple inheritance every fifty thousand lines of code or so, and I can
usually fudge it. I'm just curious if multiple inheritance is on the radar
or not. Thanks.
Best,
Joe
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at
all, no
one is proposing we *remove* the old prototypal stuff.
The class syntax solves one set of problems. The more flexible prototypal
stuff solves another, and from my own experience they work pretty well
together.
Joe
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Benjamin (Inglor) Gruenbaum <
ing..
refers to .next().value.
Communication error on my part.
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Benjamin (Inglor) Gruenbaum <
ing...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Joe, I don't think we're having the same discussion.
>
> Again, this is about the issue Katelyn raised about the retur
Again, where does this mutation occur? The spec shouldn't allow any such
thing to begin with; it should mandate exactly what my compiler does: as
soon as .next returns, copy .value into the loop variable. The developer
shouldn't have any access to the return value from within the loop at all;
if
le about a major,
show-stopping issue such as this. JS performance has gotten to the point
where people like me write *CAD software* in it. Usable iterators are
important for such things.
Frankly, I find this sudden embrace of good coding practices odd in a
language that practically sets the floor f
r. This
requirement basically makes JS useless for anything other than minor
scripting tasks. The VM people may not have any choice but to optimize it.
Joe
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
tants. This does
seem a bit silly.
Joe
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Rick Waldron
wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, June 30, 2014, Frankie Bagnardi wrote:
>
>> String.prototype.endsWith and Object.is are functions, and their JS
>> implementations are nontrivial to memorize and
laiming there isn't a sense of corporate identity among JS
developers is fooling themselves.
I'm on the side of TC39, by the way. I don't believe in democracy in
software. That's why we have standards organizations.
Joe
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:41 PM, Garrett Smith
wrote:
>
gh experience of how they work in practice.
Best,
Joe
On May 27, 2014 12:03 AM, "Claude Pache" wrote:
>
> Since nobody gave their advice, I'll give my own one :-)
>
> The particular case of the Existential Operator (conditional property
> access and conditional metho
I don't think silent fails are always a bad thing. I've been trying to
make my code robust against unexpected nulls, preferably only in release
mode. That's not always easy to do, though (restricting the behavior to
release builds), which is why I consciously chose to wait a year until the
code w
After writing an ES6->ES5 compiler, I've come to the conclusion that ES5
*is* an intermediary language. For dynamic, duck-typed languages it's not
so bad.
I always found the Dart people's arguments the most persuasive:
https://www.dartlang.org/articles/why-not-bytecode/
Basically, any language
w the presence of one ?. operator causes the entire chain (including
normal .'s) to be transformed. Not sure what the side effects of this
would be, performance-wise.
Joe
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Dmitry Soshnikov <
dmitry.soshni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Woah! :) 2012 -- so I
h language extensions.
Or would the sourcemaps contain their own AST definitions?
Joe
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Is the function* syntax for generators final? I'm curious what the
justification for it is, but mostly I just need to know if it's likely to
change.
Thanks,
Joe
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/l
p to date.
>
> To answer your question, the iterator protocol hasn't changed back to
> using StopIteration. It's still { value, done }.
>
> > On Feb 20, 2014, at 2:27 AM, joe wrote:
> >
> > A while back, the wiki Harmony draft spec for iterators changed from a
has yet to switch back, and before I bug the
developers on that project I wanted to make sure that StopIteration is, in
fact, back.
Thanks,
Joe Eagar
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Sent from my Cricket smartphone
es-discuss-requ...@mozilla.org wrote:
>Send es-discuss mailing list submissions to
> es-discuss@mozilla.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>or, via email, send a message with
Chrome appears to follow the spec a little closer. Observe the following:
var someVar = 5;
//valid syntax, throws ReferenceError
function passPlease(){
alert(someVar);
}
//invalid syntax, throws SyntaxError
function failPlease(){
alert(someVar);
}
-Joe
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote
jQuery is a somewhat poor / extreme example - jQuery has taken a monolithic
approach to code structuring - while more modern and full featured
frameworks tend towards load-on-demand, and hence can offer
'capability-loading'.
That said, I do think that it is worth keeping in mind that there will
co
If you're curious about interpreters, I'd like to point out that we have
one that we think is pretty decent:
https://github.com/brownplt/LambdaS5
It now has reasonable, though incomplete, coverage of Test262:
http://cs.brown.edu/~joe/public/results/summary.html
Further, it implemen
What makes people happy is probably complex and somewhat different for
different people.
I think that for many in this particular line of work it could probably be
identified by 'being in the zone'. I find that it tends to accompany a sense
of accomplishment, discovery by creation of value ( be it
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Juan Ignacio Dopazo
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Joe Developer
> wrote:
>
>> Truthfully the -> arrow construct is one that I have an aversion to which
>> borders ( I'll admit ) on the irrational
>>
>
> My em
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Juan Ignacio Dopazo wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Joe Developer > wrote:
>
>>
>> I was very close to mentioning in my response to Brendan that the first
>> thing that came to mind regarding deep nesting and cl
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Juan Ignacio Dopazo
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Joe Developer
> wrote:
>
>> I'll admit that in my years I have never run into a situation where I
>> found myself forced into nesting levels that I found problematic. This co
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:
> On Oct 12, 2011, at 9:53 AM, Joe Developer wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Axel Rauschmayer
> wrote:
>
>> What are you saying? I see two possible interpretations of what you have
>> written.
>>
function definitions marching
ever rightward" should raise a red flag - indicative more of unfamiliarity
with named functions and scope binding rather than actual language
deficiencies.
I think an important question here is:
Who are you actually trying to serve with your cha
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
> I would implore those doing this design work to offer greater weight to the
> options of people who are *using* the language more than they are spending
> their time on this list.
>
> Users are generally under-represented on standards, we're
60 matches
Mail list logo
