Global lexical tier

Brendan Eich brendan at
Thu Sep 3 21:30:32 UTC 2015

Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
> On Sep 2, 2015, at 4:58 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
>> >  saam barati wrote:
>>> >>  Thanks. Reading now.
>>> >>  
>>> >>  I'm clearly bad at email :/
>> >  
>> >  Naw, this stuff is always harder to find than it should be.
>> >  
>> >  I was there, I just re-read and re-remembered. I do not agree with Allen that some tiny needle was uniquely threaded. Rather, an aesthetic preference for the new ES6 binding forms to have a lexical contour of their own when used at top level prevailed. This leads to problems, not all of which were known at the time -- but some problems were noted.
> I didn't mean to imply that it was the only threading of the requirement needles, but it was the one we could reach consensus on. It isn't even my favorite ( I would of preferred something similar to Saam's suggestion)

Global script is global, though. I don't see how you can have

   class Widget {...}
   let w = new Widget();

fail for want of an extra step to export Widget from the first script 
and import it into the second. Modules, sure, but scripts aren't modules.

Anyway, we indeed seek consensus and give up our favorites, saving them 
for told-you-so moments later ;-).

> but consensus on something was necessary in order to have publish a standard.

Yep. But this is es-discuss, so fair to discuss (and rehash every year 
:-P), and what's more: implementor feedback is way overdue. That's what 
Jason is bringing to us, we need to attend to it.

ES6 took a lot of risk running ahead of any implementor. Last time, we 
promise, eh?


More information about the es-discuss mailing list