ES4 implementation process, teams, and meetings

Brendan Eich brendan at
Tue Feb 26 00:49:01 PST 2008

On Feb 25, 2008, at 5:58 PM, Waldemar Horwat wrote:

> Brendan Eich wrote:
>> Thanks for understanding. Now with that in mind, please re-read  
>> Jeff's
>> post and mine. We are talking about working intensively in the next
>> three months on both specs and implementation. Now is the time to  
>> step
>> up. Apple was /hors de combat/ for a long time in Ecma TC39.  
>> Kicking the
>> legs out from under the table and pointing at the floor is not good
>> citizenship in my book, whatever our (real) failings in keeping
>> proto-specs up to date.
> This is getting a little too belligerent.

My apologies, I did not intend that.

> Maciej has a point which several of us share.  For things that  
> haven't been discussed actively, I too have little idea about what  
> their status is or where is the correct place to look for the  
> current understanding of their design.  This became a problem when  
> we went from using proposals to relying on individual trac  
> tickets.  I think we should go back to maintaining proposals.

I agree, and I've done that with a proposal (iterators and  
generators) I've tended, but it depends on structural types and type  
paramters. There, the RI and Cormac's paper would need to be turned  
into wiki'ed content. Is that a good use of time? This gets back to  
the question of the RI as an informative construct, which was what  
Graydon referred to with the "kicking the legs out from under the  
table" metaphor.

If the RI is not acceptable to some, but nevertheless important for  
testability and significant parts of the final spec, then we face the  
task of translating parts of it into prose. Graydon's SML-lowered-to- 
English script may be helpful, but new prose is needed too.

Rather than update wiki'ed proposals, we've been planning on writing  
more integrated specs. Lars has a library spec that should be  
reviewable. Jeff is working on an ES3 spec based on the RI, I  
believe. If we pursue this course, then we need to do something with  
the out of date parts of the wiki to avoid confusion. Things should  
get better over the next month, but not soon enough.


More information about the Es4-discuss mailing list