... A community is writing the spec...

Alex Russell slightlyoff at google.com
Tue Sep 9 14:54:11 PDT 2014


Is there seriously going to be no attempt whatsoever to moderate this list?


On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:42 AM, L2L 2L <emanuelallen at hotmail.com> wrote:

> ... This language is turning note in an application than a programming
> language.
>
> It could of been a commonjs thing... Long live ES5+.
>
> I like the let, and const syntax add on. Foo feature and fits into the
> language.
>
> Yes ai agree they should release as CSS is releasing.
>
> E-S4L
> N-S4L
>
> > On Sep 9, 2014, at 6:36 AM, "Herby Vojčík" <herby at mailbox.sk> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > L2L 2L wrote:
> >> It worry me... That a community is writing the spec... That a community
> >
> > Well, not the community is writing the spec. AWB is. :-)
> > And he can be pretty tough, I more or less stopped reading this list
> thoroughly after his letting one of the issues I saw as important left
> ignored.
> >
> > Nevertheless:
> >
> >> is writing the spec.... Look like W3C... That everyone is striving to
> >> get what they want in the language.
> >>
> >> Most of us are ES5 developers.... Meaning we don't delve into ES6 and
> >> what else to come.
> >>
> >> let, const, and a couple of others spec implantation is okay. These help
> >> better the language... But your adding feature and no trying to better
> >> what's already there.
> >>
> >> You might as well call yourself W3C equivalent.E
> >>
> >> As long as one can write compliant ES5.
> >>
> >> A new more stricture spec/style is being made. It's call ES5+ meaning
> >> that all compliant code is to be writing in ES5 and additional add on as
> >> the let and const statement plus other +.
> >>
> >> What I see is more functionality of the browser api then an actually
> >> language. A lot of us hope this spec die, as did ES4.
> >>
> >> Most of what you're adding could have been another add on spec... Like
> >> commonjs add on.
> >
> > I liked the idea of ES6 pretty much. The commitee was pretty strict in
> not adding too much, mostly paving cowpaths, had some roadmap, according to
> which ES6 should be approved in end of 2013.
> >
> > Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from
> what I see.
> >
> > I got delusioned as well.
> >
> > Isn't the model of big new editions of spec over; in the times we live
> now, with two-week frequent releases? I think ES6 will never see the light
> when taken from this approach. That's why, shouldn't the release policy be
> changed so that:
> >
> > - More frequent, albeit smaller, releases are embraced as a rule;
> > - ES5.5 will be scheduled (and delivered) as a Christmas present in
> 2014, selecting only small subset of less controversial items (let, const,
> Reflect global object with all API applicable to ES5.5, possibly block
> scope; no modules, no classes (unless there is consensus they are already
> near to perfect, though my issue was about new/super inconsistency), no
> symbols, no proxies, no for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions, no
> promises);
> >  - schedule ES5.6 (and deliver it) for July 2015 with, for example,
> for-of, iterators, generators, comprehensions (it's all related, so in a
> single set) and if possible, classes and/or promises;
> >  ... etc.
> >  Possibly switching to 6 when something big gets in (symbols, classes,
> proxies).
> >
> > This would be nice. Really nice. To all of us who want to get ES.next
> and actually start developing in it.
> >
> > Thanks, Herby
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140909/501642fc/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list