... A community is writing the spec...

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
35 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

... A community is writing the spec...

Emanuel Allen
It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to get what they want in the language.

Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and what else to come.

let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better what's already there.

You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E

As long as one can write compliant ES5.

A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as the let and const statement plus other +.

What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.

Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like commonjs add on.

Have fun destroying a language.

ES5+4Life

E-S4L

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Francisco Ferreira
I disagree,

Although I don't comment here, I do follow the discussion and I have been working with --harmony on Node.js for a while now. The path seems to be going in the right direction. The things that reach implementation status tend to help, I have found lot's of features very constructive.

Languages tend to evolve, that's how it is.

Francisco

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:54 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to get what they want in the language.

Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and what else to come.

let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better what's already there.

You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E

As long as one can write compliant ES5.

A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as the let and const statement plus other +.

What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.

Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like commonjs add on.

Have fun destroying a language.

ES5+4Life

E-S4L

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss



_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Emanuel Allen
Francisco.... Is the developers of Node... Are they going to force us to use ES6 syntax in newer version of Node?

There are a group of us who truly wish to stay ES5 with the additional add on as said: ES5+.

... So are they?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:58 AM, "Francisco Ferreira" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I disagree,

Although I don't comment here, I do follow the discussion and I have been working with --harmony on Node.js for a while now. The path seems to be going in the right direction. The things that reach implementation status tend to help, I have found lot's of features very constructive.

Languages tend to evolve, that's how it is.

Francisco

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:54 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to get what they want in the language.

Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and what else to come.

let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better what's already there.

You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E

As long as one can write compliant ES5.

A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as the let and const statement plus other +.

What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.

Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like commonjs add on.

Have fun destroying a language.

ES5+4Life

E-S4L

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss



_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Emanuel Allen
.... But.... What of Node? What are they planing to do to her?

Developers are cry babies!

I don't mind the spaghetti mountain... Don't think I won't progress my learning... I'm just saying that if that what I have to do to make it do what I need for it to do... Than I'll do it.

And I look into node promise and the spec promise on MDN... And I'm still not seeing the big picture. Could you give me a brief in your own words....

And this stupid ()=>{} arrow function... After seeing this I got the ideal of letting functions follow the same rules as for, if, while... That if it's one line of code, than let it be: 
function add(arg0) console.log(arg++);

With out a body --curly braces--... Funny thing is that Firefox allow this syntax style.

var arr = [];
[0,1,2,3].forEach(function(arg0)arr.push(100+arg0));
arr;

Copy & paste in Firefox to see.

And the generator function... Couldn't it have been: generator(args){
yield args += "gen"; 
console.log(args);
}

Plus with a constructor:
new Generator();
   
Just saying.... What's happening to Node?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:03 AM, "Francisco Ferreira" <[hidden email]> wrote:

ES6 is backwards compatible, you don't need to use the new features if you don't want to.

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 11:01 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
Francisco.... Is the developers of Node... Are they going to force us to use ES6 syntax in newer version of Node?

There are a group of us who truly wish to stay ES5 with the additional add on as said: ES5+.

... So are they?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:58 AM, "Francisco Ferreira" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I disagree,

Although I don't comment here, I do follow the discussion and I have been working with --harmony on Node.js for a while now. The path seems to be going in the right direction. The things that reach implementation status tend to help, I have found lot's of features very constructive.

Languages tend to evolve, that's how it is.

Francisco

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:54 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to get what they want in the language.

Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and what else to come.

let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better what's already there.

You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E

As long as one can write compliant ES5.

A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as the let and const statement plus other +.

What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.

Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like commonjs add on.

Have fun destroying a language.

ES5+4Life

E-S4L

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss




_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Herby Vojčík
In reply to this post by Emanuel Allen


L2L 2L wrote:
> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community

Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-)
And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list
thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left
ignored.

Nevertheless:

> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to
> get what they want in the language.
>
> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and
> what else to come.
>
> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help
> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better
> what's already there.
>
> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E
>
> As long as one can write compliant ES5.
>
> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning
> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as
> the let and const statement plus other +.
>
> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually
> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.
>
> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like
> commonjs add on.

I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in
not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according
to which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013.

Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from
what I see.

I got delusioned as well.

Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live
now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the
light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release
policy be changed so that:

  - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule;
  - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in
2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let,
const, Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly
block scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are
already near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super
inconsistency), no symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators,
generators, comprehensions, no promises);
   - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example,
for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a
single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises;
   ... etc.
   Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes,
proxies).

This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next
and actually start developing in it.

Thanks, Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Emanuel Allen
... This language is turning note in an application than a programming language.

It could of been a commonjs thing... Long live ES5+.

I like the let, and const syntax add on. Foo feature and fits into the language.

Yes ai agree they should release as CSS is releasing.

E-S4L
N-S4L

> On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> L2L 2L wrote:
>> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community
>
> Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-)
> And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left ignored.
>
> Nevertheless:
>
>> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to
>> get what they want in the language.
>>
>> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and
>> what else to come.
>>
>> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help
>> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better
>> what's already there.
>>
>> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E
>>
>> As long as one can write compliant ES5.
>>
>> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning
>> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as
>> the let and const statement plus other +.
>>
>> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually
>> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.
>>
>> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like
>> commonjs add on.
>
> I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according to which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013.
>
> Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.
>
> I got delusioned as well.
>
> Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:
>
> - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule;
> - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in 2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let, const, Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly block scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are already near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super inconsistency), no symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions, no promises);
>  - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example, for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises;
>  ... etc.
>  Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes, proxies).
>
> This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next and actually start developing in it.
>
> Thanks, Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Alex Russell-4
Is there seriously going to be no attempt whatsoever to moderate this list?


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:42 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
... This language is turning note in an application than a programming language.

It could of been a commonjs thing... Long live ES5+.

I like the let, and const syntax add on. Foo feature and fits into the language.

Yes ai agree they should release as CSS is releasing.

E-S4L
N-S4L

> On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> L2L 2L wrote:
>> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community
>
> Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-)
> And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left ignored.
>
> Nevertheless:
>
>> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to
>> get what they want in the language.
>>
>> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and
>> what else to come.
>>
>> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help
>> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better
>> what's already there.
>>
>> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E
>>
>> As long as one can write compliant ES5.
>>
>> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning
>> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as
>> the let and const statement plus other +.
>>
>> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually
>> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.
>>
>> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like
>> commonjs add on.
>
> I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according to which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013.
>
> Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.
>
> I got delusioned as well.
>
> Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:
>
> - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule;
> - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in 2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let, const, Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly block scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are already near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super inconsistency), no symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions, no promises);
>  - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example, for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises;
>  ... etc.
>  Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes, proxies).
>
> This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next and actually start developing in it.
>
> Thanks, Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss


_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Emanuel Allen
Huh? ... Should I be doing so? ... Huh?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:54 PM, "Alex Russell" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Is there seriously going to be no attempt whatsoever to moderate this list?


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:42 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
... This language is turning note in an application than a programming language.

It could of been a commonjs thing... Long live ES5+.

I like the let, and const syntax add on. Foo feature and fits into the language.

Yes ai agree they should release as CSS is releasing.

E-S4L
N-S4L

> On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> L2L 2L wrote:
>> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community
>
> Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-)
> And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left ignored.
>
> Nevertheless:
>
>> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to
>> get what they want in the language.
>>
>> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and
>> what else to come.
>>
>> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help
>> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better
>> what's already there.
>>
>> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E
>>
>> As long as one can write compliant ES5.
>>
>> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning
>> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as
>> the let and const statement plus other +.
>>
>> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually
>> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.
>>
>> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like
>> commonjs add on.
>
> I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according to which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013.
>
> Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.
>
> I got delusioned as well.
>
> Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:
>
> - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule;
> - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in 2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let, const, Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly block scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are already near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super inconsistency), no symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions, no promises);
>  - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example, for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises;
>  ... etc.
>  Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes, proxies).
>
> This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next and actually start developing in it.
>
> Thanks, Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Emanuel Allen
Anyone care to justify the use case for the proxy object?

Yes I understand it'll let us defined the behavior of an object. But couldn't that be a method for the Object constructor?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:55 PM, "L2L 2L" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Huh? ... Should I be doing so? ... Huh?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:54 PM, "Alex Russell" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Is there seriously going to be no attempt whatsoever to moderate this list?


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:42 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
... This language is turning note in an application than a programming language.

It could of been a commonjs thing... Long live ES5+.

I like the let, and const syntax add on. Foo feature and fits into the language.

Yes ai agree they should release as CSS is releasing.

E-S4L
N-S4L

> On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> L2L 2L wrote:
>> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community
>
> Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-)
> And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left ignored.
>
> Nevertheless:
>
>> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to
>> get what they want in the language.
>>
>> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and
>> what else to come.
>>
>> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help
>> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better
>> what's already there.
>>
>> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E
>>
>> As long as one can write compliant ES5.
>>
>> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning
>> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as
>> the let and const statement plus other +.
>>
>> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually
>> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.
>>
>> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like
>> commonjs add on.
>
> I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according to which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013.
>
> Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.
>
> I got delusioned as well.
>
> Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:
>
> - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule;
> - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in 2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let, const, Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly block scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are already near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super inconsistency), no symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions, no promises);
>  - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example, for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises;
>  ... etc.
>  Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes, proxies).
>
> This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next and actually start developing in it.
>
> Thanks, Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

John Barton
You can find lots of information about design discussions by reading the ecmascript wiki, for example: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proxies.  The other good resource is the past posts to this list and the meeting minutes,  http://esdiscuss.org/

In general, the content that is painstakingly written down in the ES6 specification has been designed and discussed in great detail. The appropriate level of comments on those features needs to be equally detailed and thoughtful.
Random comments about how you personally don't like some aspects of the design are better directed to your followers on twitter or perhaps a blog post. And of course you are free not to use any new features you dislike. I believe that is what Alex was attempting to communicate.

jjb


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:25 PM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
Anyone care to justify the use case for the proxy object?

Yes I understand it'll let us defined the behavior of an object. But couldn't that be a method for the Object constructor?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:55 PM, "L2L 2L" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Huh? ... Should I be doing so? ... Huh?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:54 PM, "Alex Russell" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Is there seriously going to be no attempt whatsoever to moderate this list?


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:42 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
... This language is turning note in an application than a programming language.

It could of been a commonjs thing... Long live ES5+.

I like the let, and const syntax add on. Foo feature and fits into the language.

Yes ai agree they should release as CSS is releasing.

E-S4L
N-S4L

> On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> L2L 2L wrote:
>> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community
>
> Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-)
> And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left ignored.
>
> Nevertheless:
>
>> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to
>> get what they want in the language.
>>
>> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and
>> what else to come.
>>
>> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help
>> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better
>> what's already there.
>>
>> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E
>>
>> As long as one can write compliant ES5.
>>
>> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning
>> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as
>> the let and const statement plus other +.
>>
>> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually
>> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.
>>
>> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like
>> commonjs add on.
>
> I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according to which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013.
>
> Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.
>
> I got delusioned as well.
>
> Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:
>
> - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule;
> - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in 2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let, const, Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly block scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are already near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super inconsistency), no symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions, no promises);
>  - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example, for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises;
>  ... etc.
>  Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes, proxies).
>
> This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next and actually start developing in it.
>
> Thanks, Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss



_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Emanuel Allen
Thank you.... Did why didn't he say so instead of crying out to a mod?

Are you a mod?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:47 PM, "John Barton" <[hidden email]> wrote:

You can find lots of information about design discussions by reading the ecmascript wiki, for example: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proxies.  The other good resource is the past posts to this list and the meeting minutes,  http://esdiscuss.org/

In general, the content that is painstakingly written down in the ES6 specification has been designed and discussed in great detail. The appropriate level of comments on those features needs to be equally detailed and thoughtful.
Random comments about how you personally don't like some aspects of the design are better directed to your followers on twitter or perhaps a blog post. And of course you are free not to use any new features you dislike. I believe that is what Alex was attempting to communicate.

jjb


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:25 PM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
Anyone care to justify the use case for the proxy object?

Yes I understand it'll let us defined the behavior of an object. But couldn't that be a method for the Object constructor?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:55 PM, "L2L 2L" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Huh? ... Should I be doing so? ... Huh?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:54 PM, "Alex Russell" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Is there seriously going to be no attempt whatsoever to moderate this list?


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:42 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
... This language is turning note in an application than a programming language.

It could of been a commonjs thing... Long live ES5+.

I like the let, and const syntax add on. Foo feature and fits into the language.

Yes ai agree they should release as CSS is releasing.

E-S4L
N-S4L

> On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> L2L 2L wrote:
>> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community
>
> Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-)
> And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left ignored.
>
> Nevertheless:
>
>> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to
>> get what they want in the language.
>>
>> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and
>> what else to come.
>>
>> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help
>> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better
>> what's already there.
>>
>> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E
>>
>> As long as one can write compliant ES5.
>>
>> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning
>> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as
>> the let and const statement plus other +.
>>
>> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually
>> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.
>>
>> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like
>> commonjs add on.
>
> I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according to which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013.
>
> Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.
>
> I got delusioned as well.
>
> Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:
>
> - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule;
> - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in 2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let, const, Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly block scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are already near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super inconsistency), no symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions, no promises);
>  - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example, for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises;
>  ... etc.
>  Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes, proxies).
>
> This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next and actually start developing in it.
>
> Thanks, Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss



_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re:[revise] ... A community is writing the spec...

Emanuel Allen
Never mind... Sorry for the messages, will attempt to make future post more to the stander of this mailing list.

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:48 PM, "L2L 2L" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thank you.... Did why didn't he say so instead of crying out to a mod?

Are you a mod?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:47 PM, "John Barton" <[hidden email]> wrote:

You can find lots of information about design discussions by reading the ecmascript wiki, for example: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proxies.  The other good resource is the past posts to this list and the meeting minutes,  http://esdiscuss.org/

In general, the content that is painstakingly written down in the ES6 specification has been designed and discussed in great detail. The appropriate level of comments on those features needs to be equally detailed and thoughtful.
Random comments about how you personally don't like some aspects of the design are better directed to your followers on twitter or perhaps a blog post. And of course you are free not to use any new features you dislike. I believe that is what Alex was attempting to communicate.

jjb


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:25 PM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
Anyone care to justify the use case for the proxy object?

Yes I understand it'll let us defined the behavior of an object. But couldn't that be a method for the Object constructor?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:55 PM, "L2L 2L" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Huh? ... Should I be doing so? ... Huh?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:54 PM, "Alex Russell" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Is there seriously going to be no attempt whatsoever to moderate this list?


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:42 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
... This language is turning note in an application than a programming language.

It could of been a commonjs thing... Long live ES5+.

I like the let, and const syntax add on. Foo feature and fits into the language.

Yes ai agree they should release as CSS is releasing.

E-S4L
N-S4L

> On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> L2L 2L wrote:
>> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community
>
> Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-)
> And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left ignored.
>
> Nevertheless:
>
>> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to
>> get what they want in the language.
>>
>> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and
>> what else to come.
>>
>> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help
>> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better
>> what's already there.
>>
>> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E
>>
>> As long as one can write compliant ES5.
>>
>> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning
>> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as
>> the let and const statement plus other +.
>>
>> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually
>> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.
>>
>> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like
>> commonjs add on.
>
> I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according to which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013.
>
> Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.
>
> I got delusioned as well.
>
> Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:
>
> - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule;
> - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in 2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let, const, Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly block scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are already near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super inconsistency), no symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions, no promises);
>  - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example, for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises;
>  ... etc.
>  Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes, proxies).
>
> This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next and actually start developing in it.
>
> Thanks, Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss


_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [revise] ... A community is writing the spec...

Axel Rauschmayer
Give yourself time to figure out ECMAScript 6 – it’s not even a standard yet! You really need to use the new features (for their intended use cases, which you may or may not encounter in your code) in order to truly understand why they make sense. The wiki can help you with that. There is also slowly appearing content on the web that explains more.

On 10 Sep 2014, at 0:51 , L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:

Never mind... Sorry for the messages, will attempt to make future post more to the stander of this mailing list.

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:48 PM, "L2L 2L" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thank you.... Did why didn't he say so instead of crying out to a mod?

Are you a mod?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:47 PM, "John Barton" <[hidden email]> wrote:

You can find lots of information about design discussions by reading the ecmascript wiki, for example: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proxies.  The other good resource is the past posts to this list and the meeting minutes,  http://esdiscuss.org/

In general, the content that is painstakingly written down in the ES6 specification has been designed and discussed in great detail. The appropriate level of comments on those features needs to be equally detailed and thoughtful.
Random comments about how you personally don't like some aspects of the design are better directed to your followers on twitter or perhaps a blog post. And of course you are free not to use any new features you dislike. I believe that is what Alex was attempting to communicate.

jjb


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:25 PM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
Anyone care to justify the use case for the proxy object?

Yes I understand it'll let us defined the behavior of an object. But couldn't that be a method for the Object constructor?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:55 PM, "L2L 2L" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Huh? ... Should I be doing so? ... Huh?

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 9, 2014, at 5:54 PM, "Alex Russell" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Is there seriously going to be no attempt whatsoever to moderate this list?


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:42 AM, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
... This language is turning note in an application than a programming language.

It could of been a commonjs thing... Long live ES5+.

I like the let, and const syntax add on. Foo feature and fits into the language.

Yes ai agree they should release as CSS is releasing.

E-S4L
N-S4L

> On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> L2L 2L wrote:
>> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community
>
> Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-)
> And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left ignored.
>
> Nevertheless:
>
>> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to
>> get what they want in the language.
>>
>> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and
>> what else to come.
>>
>> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help
>> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better
>> what's already there.
>>
>> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E
>>
>> As long as one can write compliant ES5.
>>
>> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning
>> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as
>> the let and const statement plus other +.
>>
>> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually
>> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.
>>
>> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like
>> commonjs add on.
>
> I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according to which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013.
>
> Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.
>
> I got delusioned as well.
>
> Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:
>
> - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule;
> - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in 2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let, const, Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly block scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are already near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super inconsistency), no symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions, no promises);
>  - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example, for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises;
>  ... etc.
>  Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes, proxies).
>
> This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next and actually start developing in it.
>
> Thanks, Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss


_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
<Mail Attachment.txt>_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

-- 
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
[hidden email]
rauschma.de




_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Axel Rauschmayer
In reply to this post by Herby Vojčík
Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.

The spec already looks pretty complete to me and Traceur and TypeScript do a pretty good job of letting you use ES6 today.

As previously announced here, the current schedule is to be finished by the end of the year, to start the publication process in March 2014 and to have a standard by June 2014.

I got delusioned as well.

Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:

It has already changed, but not for ES6. ECMAScript 7 and later will have fixed release dates. Only features that are ready at a given date will be included.

-- 
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
[hidden email]
rauschma.de




_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Emanuel Allen
This.... These feature--most of them-- would be something I see in the browser api... This is truly looking like w3c working group...

... But I don't see any chance of my words changing the direction of the spec.... Especially when you consider the original designer of the language steering this course...

So in term, if you can't beat them, change them, might as well aid them
--in what I feel to be In truth, the destruction of the original syntax, by the original creature of the language... Kinda wish they had a flag for these new syntax to be set... At least than, those who are toward the originally syntax style, would feel some sort of preservation for it--
In their quest to farther add on to ES as a --application-- language.

--as duo to a private email by /be. This to me is not trolling, I'm responding to this person who respond two times to my post... So in terms, I should not have to worry about being banned from the mailing list cause of this message.

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 10, 2014, at 1:17 AM, "Axel Rauschmayer" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.

The spec already looks pretty complete to me and Traceur and TypeScript do a pretty good job of letting you use ES6 today.

As previously announced here, the current schedule is to be finished by the end of the year, to start the publication process in March 2014 and to have a standard by June 2014.

I got delusioned as well.

Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:

It has already changed, but not for ES6. ECMAScript 7 and later will have fixed release dates. Only features that are ready at a given date will be included.

-- 
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
[hidden email]
rauschma.de




_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Sebastian Zartner-2
I don't see why you're complaining. If you don't like the features in ES6, then just don't use them. The features of ES5 are still available.
If you want to have more strict code, then add a "use strict"; statement to your code.
And if you're against adding more features to the core language, then you should have complained several years ago at the planning of ES6.

Sebastian

On 10 September 2014 08:12, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
This.... These feature--most of them-- would be something I see in the browser api... This is truly looking like w3c working group...

... But I don't see any chance of my words changing the direction of the spec.... Especially when you consider the original designer of the language steering this course...

So in term, if you can't beat them, change them, might as well aid them
--in what I feel to be In truth, the destruction of the original syntax, by the original creature of the language... Kinda wish they had a flag for these new syntax to be set... At least than, those who are toward the originally syntax style, would feel some sort of preservation for it--
In their quest to farther add on to ES as a --application-- language.

--as duo to a private email by /be. This to me is not trolling, I'm responding to this person who respond two times to my post... So in terms, I should not have to worry about being banned from the mailing list cause of this message.

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 10, 2014, at 1:17 AM, "Axel Rauschmayer" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.

The spec already looks pretty complete to me and Traceur and TypeScript do a pretty good job of letting you use ES6 today.

As previously announced here, the current schedule is to be finished by the end of the year, to start the publication process in March 2014 and to have a standard by June 2014.

I got delusioned as well.

Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:

It has already changed, but not for ES6. ECMAScript 7 and later will have fixed release dates. Only features that are ready at a given date will be included.

-- 
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
[hidden email]
rauschma.de




_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss



_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Emanuel Allen
.... Yeah I guess I'm pretty late for that huh... No this is great, the more feature, the better. A lot of these feature would cause certain application not to be needed... In other words, use more of the language and less libraries.... Why you at it, how about reviving E4X? That way, we can lose the DOM api. After all, if ES was made for the web, than there should be method to access the DOM. It could be an object, like how the E4X was, but better.

On another note, this is now becoming the mini-type application/JavaScript, than text/JavaScript.

But consider the E4X though.

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 10, 2014, at 9:35 AM, "Sebastian Zartner" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I don't see why you're complaining. If you don't like the features in ES6, then just don't use them. The features of ES5 are still available.
If you want to have more strict code, then add a "use strict"; statement to your code.
And if you're against adding more features to the core language, then you should have complained several years ago at the planning of ES6.

Sebastian

On 10 September 2014 08:12, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
This.... These feature--most of them-- would be something I see in the browser api... This is truly looking like w3c working group...

... But I don't see any chance of my words changing the direction of the spec.... Especially when you consider the original designer of the language steering this course...

So in term, if you can't beat them, change them, might as well aid them
--in what I feel to be In truth, the destruction of the original syntax, by the original creature of the language... Kinda wish they had a flag for these new syntax to be set... At least than, those who are toward the originally syntax style, would feel some sort of preservation for it--
In their quest to farther add on to ES as a --application-- language.

--as duo to a private email by /be. This to me is not trolling, I'm responding to this person who respond two times to my post... So in terms, I should not have to worry about being banned from the mailing list cause of this message.

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 10, 2014, at 1:17 AM, "Axel Rauschmayer" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.

The spec already looks pretty complete to me and Traceur and TypeScript do a pretty good job of letting you use ES6 today.

As previously announced here, the current schedule is to be finished by the end of the year, to start the publication process in March 2014 and to have a standard by June 2014.

I got delusioned as well.

Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:

It has already changed, but not for ES6. ECMAScript 7 and later will have fixed release dates. Only features that are ready at a given date will be included.

-- 
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
[hidden email]
rauschma.de




_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss



_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Mark S. Miller-2

Hi L2L, this message is uninformed that I must ask you to move to another forum, until you learn a lot more about js and web programming. This is not the place.

On Sep 10, 2014 6:47 AM, "L2L 2L" <[hidden email]> wrote:
.... Yeah I guess I'm pretty late for that huh... No this is great, the more feature, the better. A lot of these feature would cause certain application not to be needed... In other words, use more of the language and less libraries.... Why you at it, how about reviving E4X? That way, we can lose the DOM api. After all, if ES was made for the web, than there should be method to access the DOM. It could be an object, like how the E4X was, but better.

On another note, this is now becoming the mini-type application/JavaScript, than text/JavaScript.

But consider the E4X though.

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 10, 2014, at 9:35 AM, "Sebastian Zartner" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I don't see why you're complaining. If you don't like the features in ES6, then just don't use them. The features of ES5 are still available.
If you want to have more strict code, then add a "use strict"; statement to your code.
And if you're against adding more features to the core language, then you should have complained several years ago at the planning of ES6.

Sebastian

On 10 September 2014 08:12, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
This.... These feature--most of them-- would be something I see in the browser api... This is truly looking like w3c working group...

... But I don't see any chance of my words changing the direction of the spec.... Especially when you consider the original designer of the language steering this course...

So in term, if you can't beat them, change them, might as well aid them
--in what I feel to be In truth, the destruction of the original syntax, by the original creature of the language... Kinda wish they had a flag for these new syntax to be set... At least than, those who are toward the originally syntax style, would feel some sort of preservation for it--
In their quest to farther add on to ES as a --application-- language.

--as duo to a private email by /be. This to me is not trolling, I'm responding to this person who respond two times to my post... So in terms, I should not have to worry about being banned from the mailing list cause of this message.

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 10, 2014, at 1:17 AM, "Axel Rauschmayer" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.

The spec already looks pretty complete to me and Traceur and TypeScript do a pretty good job of letting you use ES6 today.

As previously announced here, the current schedule is to be finished by the end of the year, to start the publication process in March 2014 and to have a standard by June 2014.

I got delusioned as well.

Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:

It has already changed, but not for ES6. ECMAScript 7 and later will have fixed release dates. Only features that are ready at a given date will be included.

-- 
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
[hidden email]
rauschma.de




_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss



_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss


_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Mark Miller-2

Meant "this message is so uninformed that...".

On Sep 10, 2014 6:55 AM, "Mark S. Miller" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi L2L, this message is uninformed that I must ask you to move to another forum, until you learn a lot more about js and web programming. This is not the place.

On Sep 10, 2014 6:47 AM, "L2L 2L" <[hidden email]> wrote:
.... Yeah I guess I'm pretty late for that huh... No this is great, the more feature, the better. A lot of these feature would cause certain application not to be needed... In other words, use more of the language and less libraries.... Why you at it, how about reviving E4X? That way, we can lose the DOM api. After all, if ES was made for the web, than there should be method to access the DOM. It could be an object, like how the E4X was, but better.

On another note, this is now becoming the mini-type application/JavaScript, than text/JavaScript.

But consider the E4X though.

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 10, 2014, at 9:35 AM, "Sebastian Zartner" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I don't see why you're complaining. If you don't like the features in ES6, then just don't use them. The features of ES5 are still available.
If you want to have more strict code, then add a "use strict"; statement to your code.
And if you're against adding more features to the core language, then you should have complained several years ago at the planning of ES6.

Sebastian

On 10 September 2014 08:12, L2L 2L <[hidden email]> wrote:
This.... These feature--most of them-- would be something I see in the browser api... This is truly looking like w3c working group...

... But I don't see any chance of my words changing the direction of the spec.... Especially when you consider the original designer of the language steering this course...

So in term, if you can't beat them, change them, might as well aid them
--in what I feel to be In truth, the destruction of the original syntax, by the original creature of the language... Kinda wish they had a flag for these new syntax to be set... At least than, those who are toward the originally syntax style, would feel some sort of preservation for it--
In their quest to farther add on to ES as a --application-- language.

--as duo to a private email by /be. This to me is not trolling, I'm responding to this person who respond two times to my post... So in terms, I should not have to worry about being banned from the mailing list cause of this message.

E-S4L
N-S4L

On Sep 10, 2014, at 1:17 AM, "Axel Rauschmayer" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from what I see.

The spec already looks pretty complete to me and Traceur and TypeScript do a pretty good job of letting you use ES6 today.

As previously announced here, the current schedule is to be finished by the end of the year, to start the publication process in March 2014 and to have a standard by June 2014.

I got delusioned as well.

Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be changed so that:

It has already changed, but not for ES6. ECMAScript 7 and later will have fixed release dates. Only features that are ready at a given date will be included.

-- 
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
[hidden email]
rauschma.de




_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss



_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss


_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss


_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ... A community is writing the spec...

Herby Vojčík
In reply to this post by Axel Rauschmayer


Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
>> Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet,
>> from what I see.
>
> The spec already looks pretty complete to me and Traceur and TypeScript
> do a pretty good job of letting you use ES6 today.
>
> As previously announced here, the current schedule is to be finished by
> the end of the year, to start the publication process in March 2014 and
> to have a standard by June 2014.

They already happened. Did you mean 2015?

>> I got delusioned as well.
>>
>> Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live
>> now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the
>> light when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release
>> policy be changed so that:
>
> It has already changed, but not for ES6. ECMAScript 7 and later will
> have fixed release dates. Only features that are ready at a given date
> will be included.

Hallelujah!

> Background: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262
>
> --
> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
> rauschma.de

Herby

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
12