Making the identifier identification strawman less restrictive

Erik Arvidsson erik.arvidsson at gmail.com
Mon Oct 14 14:21:53 PDT 2013


I'm concerned about the latest version of this on the wiki. The
edition parameter requires that we ship 2 tables today. This seems
like it might change to 3 in ES7 and n in ES(n+4). I think the only
reasonable requirement is that it matches what the engine actually
uses. For tools it seems better for them to include this table. I
don't want all runtimes to have to pay for something that only tools
need.

On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Mathias Bynens <mathias at qiwi.be> wrote:
> Forwarding Marijn’s message since he’s not subscribed to es-discuss.
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Marijn Haverbeke <marijnh at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: Making the identifier identification strawman less restrictive
>> Date: 10 October 2013 11:13:34 CEST
>> To: Norbert Lindenberg <ecmascript at lindenbergsoftware.com>
>> Cc: Mathias Bynens <mathias at qiwi.be>, es-discuss <es-discuss at mozilla.org>, Anton Kovalyov <anton at kovalyov.net>, Yusuke SUZUKI <utatane.tea at gmail.com>, ariya.hidayat at gmail.com, Jeremy Ashkenas <jashkenas at gmail.com>, mihai at bazon.net
>>
>> I have no particular opinion about this. Identifiers with obscure
>> characters tend to be so rare that I don't expect to have any trouble
>> with this except for constructed conformance tests. Since you'll
>> probably be the people who are going to construct such tests, I'll
>> leave you to figure out what's sane.
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss



-- 
erik


More information about the es-discuss mailing list