Odd idea

Brendan Eich brendan at mozilla.org
Sun May 18 01:17:23 PDT 2008

On May 17, 2008, at 9:00 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:

> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 8:54 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org>  
> wrote:
>> No, we want a number line that goes up sensibly. JS3.1 if it  
>> follows 1.7
>> would have everything on board for ES3.1 + other stuff not in ES3  
>> that
>> prefigures ES4.
> I couldn't parse that. Could you restate?

JS version number line:

  1.0     1.1     1.2     1.3     1.4     ECMAv3  1.5     1.6      
1.7     1.8
          ^                       ^
          |                       |
          basis for ECMAv1        close to ECMAv2

Now, where does "JS3.1" go? If it's exactly the same as anything like  
what's proposed for ES3.1, it does not fit on the number line above.  
The line must fork somewhere between ECMAv3 and 1.6 (inclusive),  
since ES3.1 as proposed does not have much (if anything) from JS1.7  
or 1.8. The line must fork, because there are things in ES3.1 not in  
any version on the line above.


More information about the Es4-discuss mailing list