return when desugaring to closures

Brendan Eich brendan at
Thu Aug 21 18:18:27 PDT 2008

On Aug 21, 2008, at 5:48 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:

> On Aug 21, 2008, at 5:39 PM, Peter Michaux wrote:
>> How do outsiders know which proposals have reached committee
>> consensus?
> I said that many on the committee were in favor, notionally and in
> some details, of much of JS1.7's "convenience features", and some
> beyond:
> let as new var
> destructuring assignment and binding forms
> generators (modulo keyword issue)
> expression closures
> spread operator
> rest parameters
> optional parameters

Of course, consensus (meaning "general agreement") and "many ... were  
in favor" are not the same thing. It's not over till the spec is  
frozen by Ecma well in advance of a General Assembly vote, and then  
on to ISO. Still, it's important to build consensus where possible,  
not throw everything open. That's what I meant by "not everything is  
a blank slate."

You mentioned how consensus could be spoiled easily in as large a  
committee as we have, and you're right: that's a risk. I hope we'll  
avoid it. If we get stuck, we'll have to back away from the sticky  
proposal. Some members may implement it to prove fitness and test  
against real developers (Decimal should be done this way, IMHO).

If all proposals get stuck, I'll cry shenanigans, because I do not  
believe that the strong technical contributors we have on committee,  
who all share values around lexical scope and dynamic typing, will  
get stuck without someone putting glue on chairs -- if you get what I  
mean :-/.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Es-discuss mailing list