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

Mark Miller erights at gmail.com
Wed Sep 10 06:57:00 PDT 2014


Meant "this message is so uninformed that...".
On Sep 10, 2014 6:55 AM, "Mark S. Miller" <erights at google.com> wrote:

> Hi L2L, this message is uninformed that I must ask you to move to another
> forum, until you learn a lot more about js and web programming. This is not
> the place.
> On Sep 10, 2014 6:47 AM, "L2L 2L" <emanuelallen at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> .... Yeah I guess I'm pretty late for that huh... No this is great, the
>> more feature, the better. A lot of these feature would cause certain
>> application not to be needed... In other words, use more of the language
>> and less libraries.... Why you at it, how about reviving E4X? That way, we
>> can lose the DOM api. After all, if ES was made for the web, than there
>> should be method to access the DOM. It could be an object, like how the E4X
>> was, but better.
>>
>> On another note, this is now becoming the mini-type
>> application/JavaScript, than text/JavaScript.
>>
>> But consider the E4X though.
>>
>> E-S4L
>> N-S4L
>>
>> On Sep 10, 2014, at 9:35 AM, "Sebastian Zartner" <
>> sebastianzartner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't see why you're complaining. If you don't like the features in
>> ES6, then just don't use them. The features of ES5 are still available.
>> If you want to have more strict code, then add a "use strict"; statement
>> to your code.
>> And if you're against adding more features to the core language, then you
>> should have complained several years ago at the planning of ES6.
>>
>> Sebastian
>>
>> On 10 September 2014 08:12, L2L 2L <emanuelallen at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This.... These feature--most of them-- would be something I see in the
>>> browser api... This is truly looking like w3c working group...
>>>
>>> ... But I don't see any chance of my words changing the direction of the
>>> spec.... Especially when you consider the original designer of the language
>>> steering this course...
>>>
>>> So in term, if you can't beat them, change them, might as well aid them
>>> --in what I feel to be In truth, the destruction of the original syntax,
>>> by the original creature of the language... Kinda wish they had a flag for
>>> these new syntax to be set... At least than, those who are toward the
>>> originally syntax style, would feel some sort of preservation for it--
>>> In their quest to farther add on to ES as a --application-- language.
>>>
>>> --as duo to a private email by /be. This to me is not trolling, I'm
>>> responding to this person who respond two times to my post... So in terms,
>>> I should not have to worry about being banned from the mailing list cause
>>> of this message.
>>>
>>> E-S4L
>>> N-S4L
>>>
>>> On Sep 10, 2014, at 1:17 AM, "Axel Rauschmayer" <axel at rauschma.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Now is second half of 2014, and lots of issues are not closed yet, from
>>> what I see.
>>>
>>>
>>> The spec already looks pretty complete to me and Traceur and TypeScript
>>> do a pretty good job of letting you use ES6 today.
>>>
>>> As previously announced here, the current schedule is to be finished by
>>> the end of the year, to start the publication process in March 2014 and to
>>> have a standard by June 2014.
>>>
>>> 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:
>>>
>>>
>>> It has already changed, but not for ES6. ECMAScript 7 and later will
>>> have fixed release dates. Only features that are ready at a given date will
>>> be included.
>>> Background: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
>>> axel at rauschma.de
>>> rauschma.de
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> es-discuss mailing list
>>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140910/f24dc583/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list