Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Editorial: Make parameter of EvaluatePropertyAccessWithExpressionKey more precise #3164

Conversation

doehyunbaek
Copy link
Contributor

This is more precise specification with EvaluatePropertyAccessWithExpressionKey' usage and also in line with parameter specification of EvaluatePropertyAccessWithIdentifierKey.

Copy link
Member

@michaelficarra michaelficarra left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great!

@bakkot bakkot added the ready to merge Editors believe this PR needs no further reviews, and is ready to land. label Nov 1, 2023
…more precise (tc39#3164)

This is more precise specification with EvaluatePropertyAccessWithExpressionKey'
usage and also in line with parameter specification of EvaluatePropertyAccessWithIdentifierKey.
@ljharb ljharb changed the title Editorial: Make parameter of EvaluatePropertyAccessWithExpressionKey more precise. Editorial: Make parameter of EvaluatePropertyAccessWithExpressionKey more precise Nov 1, 2023
@ljharb ljharb force-pushed the EvaluatePropertyAccessWithExpressionKey-moreprecise branch from 746c558 to cc63290 Compare November 1, 2023 18:31
@ljharb ljharb merged commit cc63290 into tc39:main Nov 1, 2023
7 checks passed
zhangenming pushed a commit to zhangenming/ecma262 that referenced this pull request Dec 22, 2023
…more precise (tc39#3164)

This is more precise specification with EvaluatePropertyAccessWithExpressionKey'
usage and also in line with parameter specification of EvaluatePropertyAccessWithIdentifierKey.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
editorial change ready to merge Editors believe this PR needs no further reviews, and is ready to land.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants