Specifying template strings

Rick Waldron waldron.rick at gmail.com
Wed Jul 9 12:41:51 PDT 2014

On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Axel Rauschmayer <axel at rauschma.de> wrote:

> I find the specification of template strings still a bit difficult to
> understand:
> – The abbreviations TV and CV are used 12.2.9, but defined in

Did you mean TV and TRV?

This is no different than:
  - String SV and CV
  - Number MV

Which are all defined in Chapter 11

> – Tagged templates are explained
> via EvaluateCall(tagRef, TemplateLiteral, tailCall). I think it would be
> easier to understand if it used GetTemplateCallSite.

> – It’d be nice if untagged template strings and tagged templates could be
> mentioned closer together. They are basically the same thing and this
> structure seems to be dictated by grammar. To me, template strings are more
> like tagged templates without a tag. Would it make sense to specify them
> that way?

(no response, I'll let Allen address these)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20140709/affe5346/attachment.html>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list