Can we call it ECMAScript 6, yet?

[OpenStrat at aol.com]

I think "further along" occurs when we have made final decisions on what is 
 "in" and what is "not", because "not" starts to become "ES-Next",  What I  
would be afraid of is that "ES-6" is over populated with want-a-be's 
features  and starts to get a life of its own (remember our experience with ES-3.1 
and  ES-4) and now we have ES-5 and some initial confusion like we don't 
know what we  are doing.  There is no "rush" to name the next version 
(certainly nothing  from the Ecma side).
 
John
 
 
In a message dated 9/19/2011 4:37:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
allen at wirfs-brock.com writes:


On  Sep 19, 2011, at 3:05 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:

> 
> You're  right that the safer course is ES.next until we're further along. 
When is  "further along" in your view?
> 

One approach is to not describe  a features as "being in ES6"  until after 
it first appears in an actual  ES6 draft.   From that perspective, what is 
currently "in" (or at  least will be as soon as I upload a new draft) are 
let/const/function block  scoped declarations, destructuring 
assignment/declarations/parameters, default  parameter values, and the rest parameter. 
Probably a few other really minor  things,  too.

Allen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss  mailing  list
es-discuss at mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20110919/37e848a4/attachment.html>