Check out Dart's iterators

[Brendan Eich]

Oliver Hunt wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2013, at 1:58 PM, Brendan Eich<brendan at mozilla.com>  wrote:
>
>> Oliver Hunt wrote:
>>> So what you're saying is that people who attend in person meetings are able to veto proposals,
>> No, I didn't say that. You are good at logic, I've seen your code. I know you grok P ->  Q does not imply !P ->  !Q.
>
> It seems reasonable to interpret your statement as saying that vetos are  possible, but they aren't available to people unless they attend meetings.

Nope, not reasonable -- a fallacy as diagrammed!

> Or are you saying that vetos aren't possible in the meetings?

People in the meetings try not to die on a hill (or throw themselves in 
front of a train) unless they view it as vitally important. Given all 
the joint work, it's not a situation where someone will lightly (without 
participating regularly and contributing blood, sweat, and tears, as 
noted) say "veto!"

In the U.S. system, the CEO (that's the President) can veto, explicitly 
or implicitly (pocket veto), but again with some political care and 
restraint (could overdo it and get unpopular; could get overridden).

TC39 doesn't have a CEO, though. We all try to keep consensus, and the 
Chair tries to keep everyone making "progress". If this takes us up a 
suboptimal hill because someone (you?) wasn't there and engaged enough 
to take us up a better hill, that's the price of standardization.

BTW this is true of every standards body and indeed every collaborative 
work environment, ever.


>>> People aren't required to attend TPAC to have input at least considered for inclusion in W3 specs.
>> They don't get to throw unilateral vetos there either.
>
> I'm not actually sure where I threw a veto.

I'm glad you wrote that!

/be