On 18 April 2012 19:13, Geoffrey Sneddon gsned...@opera.com wrote:
I've just had it pointed out to me that my original email made little
sense, so let's try again:
const has historically been needed in non-strict/strict code for web
compatibility on non-IE code (typically either down to
gaz Heyes wrote:
IE has consts, use execScript with vbs. I think Andrea did a blog post
on it:
http://webreflection.blogspot.co.uk/2007/10/cow-javascript-define-php-like-function.html
Any port in a storm, but c'mon -- we're talking about 'const x = 42;'
written in JS. That has never been
On Apr 19, 2012, at 10:58 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:
gaz Heyes wrote:
IE has consts, use execScript with vbs. I think Andrea did a blog post on it:
http://webreflection.blogspot.co.uk/2007/10/cow-javascript-define-php-like-function.html
Any port in a storm, but c'mon -- we're talking about
const is needed in non-strict/strict code, as well as in Harmony code,
has historically been needed for web compatibility on non-IE code.
Chakra interestingly doesn't support it. (May simply be a case of it
being IE and not fed code that realizes upon it.)
Either we should spec it, likely
Const is spec'ed in the ES6 draft for all modes (there is really only strict
and non-strict, no longer a Harmony mode).
It is block scoped.
If anybody wants to update their current implementation ahead of ES6 that's
that they should for the ES6 draft spec..
Note that current interoperable
I've just had it pointed out to me that my original email made little
sense, so let's try again:
const has historically been needed in non-strict/strict code for web
compatibility on non-IE code (typically either down to server-side UA
sniffing or just explicitly non-support of IE). IE still
Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
As such, we should spec it: likely block-scoped in modules, and
function-scoped otherwise. We should only really not spec it if we can
get everyone who currently supports it to drop it.
The TC39 group met early this year (IIRC it was the Yahoo!-hosted
meeting in
On Apr 18, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote:
Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
As such, we should spec it: likely block-scoped in modules, and
function-scoped otherwise. We should only really not spec it if we can get
everyone who currently supports it to drop it.
The
8 matches
Mail list logo
