Wiki re-export

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

Wiki re-export

Graydon Hoare-3
Hi,

A snapshot of the ES4 committee wiki has been re-exported to the Mozilla
development website. The URL for the current snapshot is:

http://developer.mozilla.org/es4/

The URL containing HTML-differences between the previous and current
export (marked with ins and del tags) is:

http://developer.mozilla.org/es4/export-diff/

The changes represent the non-programming work of the past 3 months of
committee meetings and discussion on this mailing list. We encourage
further scrutiny of the proposals and spec-in-progress and look forward
to feedback from this mailing list.

Since the last export, the committee's work has shifted focus
significantly to the SML-based reference implementation. Not as much has
changed in the wiki as in previous exports. The reference implementation
is not presently available for public consumption, but is progressing
rapidly. We hope to accompany future updates with snapshots of the
source code.

-graydon
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wiki re-export

P T Withington
On 2007-03-14, at 17:46 EDT, Graydon Hoare wrote:

> A snapshot of the ES4 committee wiki has been re-exported to the  
> Mozilla development website. The URL for the current snapshot is:
>
> http://developer.mozilla.org/es4/

Can a new pdf be extracted?  The link on http://developer.mozilla.org/ 
es4/export-diff/spec/spec.html currently goes to a blank page.
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wiki re-export

liorean
In reply to this post by Graydon Hoare-3
On 14/03/07, Graydon Hoare <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> A snapshot of the ES4 committee wiki has been re-exported to the Mozilla
> development website. The URL for the current snapshot is:
>
> http://developer.mozilla.org/es4/
>
> The URL containing HTML-differences between the previous and current
> export (marked with ins and del tags) is:
>
> http://developer.mozilla.org/es4/export-diff/

Just a few things...



In Chapter 4, you have
> procedure multiply(v1:*,v2:*)
...
> proc divide(v1:*,v2:*)

For consistency, either proc or procedure should be used throughout
that listing instead of half using one, half the other..



In Chapter 6, you say the operators are "is", "as", "to", but the
actual operators you define are "is", "cast", "to".



In Chapter 6, I would like more detail on the type operator. For
example, does this work?

    type N={
        left:(N,Null),
        right:(N,Null),
        value:*};

In other words, could I define recursive data structures like that? If
not, is some other way of defining recursive data structures
available?



In Chapter 9, set must have a void result type. Wouldn't this destroy
the possiblity of doing things like:

    while(foo=bar)
         /* use foo */;

That would work using default accessors but not using setters...



In Chapter 10, you still use the as operator instead of the cast
operator. "var y : I = x as I"


In Chapter 13, both as and cast are listed as keywords.



This mail was brought to you by insomnia...
--
David "liorean" Andersson
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Wiki re-export

Francis Cheng
Thanks for pointing out those inconsistencies. I haven't updated the
actual specification area yet with changes brought about by the
proposals, which is why you see those inconsistencies, but I will get
started on that soon. I'm trying to wait as long as I can before editing
the actual spec to avoid rewrites due to late proposal changes, but I
should have pointed that out at the beginning of the exported
specification, sorry about that. Please feel free to point out any other
inconsistencies you find, and I'll make sure that they get corrected.
Likewise for areas that need additional explanation.

Thanks,

Francis

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of liorean
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 4:51 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Wiki re-export

...

Just a few things...



...

This mail was brought to you by insomnia...
--
David "liorean" Andersson
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss

_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wiki re-export

liorean
On 15/03/07, Francis Cheng <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Please feel free to point out any other
> inconsistencies you find, and I'll make sure that they get corrected.
> Likewise for areas that need additional explanation.


Well, I just remembered seeing another thing:

> proc asType( obj:*, type:Type ) : type
> {
> /*
>     If obj implicitly converts to type,
>     Return obj implicitly converted to type
>     Else If type includes null
>         Return null
>     Else
>         Return obj explicitly converted to type
> */
> }

Again, you're using as instead of cast.
--
David "liorean" Andersson
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wiki re-export

Brendan Eich-2
In reply to this post by liorean
On Mar 14, 2007, at 6:50 PM, liorean wrote:

> In Chapter 6, I would like more detail on the type operator. For
> example, does this work?
>
>    type N={
>        left:(N,Null),
>        right:(N,Null),
>        value:*};
>
> In other words, could I define recursive data structures like that?

No, we restrict structural types to be non-recursive. Recursive  
structural subtype checking is exponential with the simpler original  
(due to Cardelli et al.) algorithm, or quadratic with a quite-complex  
more recent algorithm, and we don't believe the costs (to  
implementors, and possibly high hidden runtime costs for users) are  
worth it.

> If
> not, is some other way of defining recursive data structures
> available?

Use nominal types.

/be
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss