I've had a request to repeat the example I showed at the meeting, so here's one:
{
if (false) {
// Say we're introducing a new cast syntax '() '
var y = (int)/fo+/.exec("abcfoo");
}
push_the_button = false;
{
z = y/x;
}
}
In ECMAScript parsing and lexing are interleaved. Th
liorean wrote:
> You're basically saying that ES4 mustn't change the meaning of any ES3
> program here. The problem I see with that is that it wouldn't allow
> any semantics expansion that reuses the old syntax forms. You'd
> confine all language changes to be either pure standards library ones
> (
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Lars Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I've spent some time examining
>> compatibility between ES3 and ES4 [1]. Opt-in to ES4 keeps you out of
>> most trouble.
2008/5/17 Steven Mascaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> That's true if the programmer in question is conf
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Lars Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> Another reaction is that there are ES4 source fragments
> > that /can/ be
> > >> parsed by ES3 compilers, but whose meaning will silently
> > be something
> > >> completely different in the two versions of the language.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven Mascaro
> Sent: 16. mai 2008 22:34
> To: es4-discuss@mozilla.org
> Subject: Forwards-compatible syntax proposal
>
> Ian Hickson wrote:
> >> Another reac
Ian Hickson wrote:
>> Another reaction is that there are ES4 source fragments that
>> /can/ be parsed by ES3 compilers, but whose meaning will silently
>> be something completely different in the two versions of the
>> language. Here are some:
>>
>> // a generator expression in ES4, a loop call
2008/5/14 Mike Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Ok. So it's a content-type which is not a mime-type even though it looks
> like one?
> Is there a separate recommendation that defines a mime-type for ecmascript?
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4329.txt>
--
David "liorean" Andersson
__
2008/5/14 zwetan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Mike,
>
> 2008/5/13 Mike Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >
> > 2008/5/13 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > >
> > > what about
> > > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=proposals:versioning
> > > and
> > > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=discussion:
Hi Mike,
2008/5/13 Mike Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> 2008/5/13 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >
> > what about
> > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=proposals:versioning
> > and
> > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=discussion:versioning
> >
[snip]
>
> On developer tools and mime-types, s
2008/5/13 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> what about
> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=proposals:versioning
> and
> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=discussion:versioning
>
> ?
>
> if I read those documents well
> ES1-4 support backward-compatibility
>
> and later for ES5 etc.
> we could ei
This wouldn't work. Without syntactically distinguishing a / that is a
division from a / that starts a regexp, there is no way to find the end of the
block. To make this distinction you need to be able to parse the contents of
the block without errors.
To complicate matters further, various l
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 4:18 AM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> One of the problems with ES4 relative to ES3 is that the new syntax means
> that a script using ES4 features doesn't work in ES3 compilers.
>
> There's not much we can do in the ES3-ES4 language migration about this.
> B
On Mon, 12 May 2008, Lars Hansen wrote:
> >
> > One of the problems with ES4 relative to ES3 is that the new syntax
> > means that a script using ES4 features doesn't work in ES3 compilers.
>
> To be precise, what you're saying is that there are ES4 source fragments
> that can't be parsed by ES3
- Original Message -
From: "Lars Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ian Hickson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 12:06 PM
Subject: RE: Forwards-compatible syntax proposal
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behal
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Hickson
> Sent: 8. mai 2008 20:18
> To: es4-discuss@mozilla.org
> Subject: Forwards-compatible syntax proposal
>
> One of the problems with ES4 relative to ES3 is that the new
> syntax means that a s
One of the problems with ES4 relative to ES3 is that the new syntax means
that a script using ES4 features doesn't work in ES3 compilers.
There's not much we can do in the ES3-ES4 language migration about this.
But we _can_ prevent this problem from existing again in ES5 and up.
I propose that
16 matches
Mail list logo
