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

Find a champion to get this proposal to stage 0 #33

Closed
TehShrike opened this Issue Mar 17, 2016 · 27 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
@TehShrike
Collaborator

TehShrike commented Mar 17, 2016

There seems to be consensus on the question of operator precedence, and I really want to see this pull request merged so that I can start using the operator!

However, on that pull request it looks like the operator needs a "TC39 champion". I'm not up on the protocol, so I'm opening this issue so that other people who have a better idea what's up can list the next steps for finding a champion and getting this proposal brought up at whatever meetings are appropriate.

@thelinuxlich

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@thelinuxlich

thelinuxlich Apr 28, 2016

C'mon, let's make this happen!

thelinuxlich commented Apr 28, 2016

C'mon, let's make this happen!

@TehShrike

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TehShrike

TehShrike May 2, 2016

Collaborator

Can anyone paste a link to reading material on how TC39 championship works?

Collaborator

TehShrike commented May 2, 2016

Can anyone paste a link to reading material on how TC39 championship works?

@stormpat

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@stormpat

stormpat May 3, 2016

@TehShrike

Heres some links:

https://tc39.github.io/process-document/
https://github.com/orgs/tc39/people <-- "champions" ?
http://tc39wiki.calculist.org/about/harmony/
https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md

If you have a new proposal you want to get into the language, you first need a TC39 champion. Head to *es-discuss to find one. If you already have a TC39 champion, send a pull request to add a link to your proposal to the Current Proposals list or the stage zero list.

stormpat commented May 3, 2016

@TehShrike

Heres some links:

https://tc39.github.io/process-document/
https://github.com/orgs/tc39/people <-- "champions" ?
http://tc39wiki.calculist.org/about/harmony/
https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md

If you have a new proposal you want to get into the language, you first need a TC39 champion. Head to *es-discuss to find one. If you already have a TC39 champion, send a pull request to add a link to your proposal to the Current Proposals list or the stage zero list.

@jasmith79

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jasmith79

jasmith79 commented May 3, 2016

Here's the es-discuss thread (warning, last message was 5 mo ago):
https://esdiscuss.org/topic/the-pipeline-operator-making-multiple-function-calls-look-great

@appsforartists

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@appsforartists

appsforartists Jul 13, 2016

It'll be easier to find a champion if you have spec text. Has anyone tried writing some?

appsforartists commented Jul 13, 2016

It'll be easier to find a champion if you have spec text. Has anyone tried writing some?

@babakness

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@babakness

babakness May 15, 2017

Keep the dream alive!

babakness commented May 15, 2017

Keep the dream alive!

@kentcdodds

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kentcdodds

kentcdodds Jun 7, 2017

Member

As a PayPal delegate for TC39, I'd like to champion this proposal. I've never done that before though so I'll probably need help from folks :) I'll be in touch! 🎉

Member

kentcdodds commented Jun 7, 2017

As a PayPal delegate for TC39, I'd like to champion this proposal. I've never done that before though so I'll probably need help from folks :) I'll be in touch! 🎉

@bterlson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bterlson

bterlson Jun 8, 2017

Member

@rbuckton and I are championing a proposal similar to this with Ron Buckton. Happy to work together! Sorry I haven't been active on this repo - there's a lot of moving pieces I wanted to figure out first. The gist of what I will propose is the |> syntax that composes with syntax for partial application (foo(10, ?)) and possibly a smaller form of the bind operator for this-based pipelining.

The dream is alive!

Member

bterlson commented Jun 8, 2017

@rbuckton and I are championing a proposal similar to this with Ron Buckton. Happy to work together! Sorry I haven't been active on this repo - there's a lot of moving pieces I wanted to figure out first. The gist of what I will propose is the |> syntax that composes with syntax for partial application (foo(10, ?)) and possibly a smaller form of the bind operator for this-based pipelining.

The dream is alive!

@appsforartists

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@appsforartists

appsforartists Jun 8, 2017

@bterlson, which repo will you be using?

appsforartists commented Jun 8, 2017

@bterlson, which repo will you be using?

@bterlson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bterlson

bterlson Jun 8, 2017

Member

@appsforartists an official TC39 one, not sure of more yet though.

Member

bterlson commented Jun 8, 2017

@appsforartists an official TC39 one, not sure of more yet though.

@jamen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jamen

jamen Jun 15, 2017

@bterlson That sounds great. Please be sure to notify here, because I actually like what you proposed there a bit more (reminds me more of Elixir). 😄

jamen commented Jun 15, 2017

@bterlson That sounds great. Please be sure to notify here, because I actually like what you proposed there a bit more (reminds me more of Elixir). 😄

@mikehaas763

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mikehaas763

mikehaas763 commented Jun 16, 2017

@bterlson awesome 👍

@hzoo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@hzoo

hzoo Jul 21, 2017

Looks like this will possibly be presented at next week's meeting: https://github.com/tc39/agendas/blob/master/2017/07.md

hzoo commented Jul 21, 2017

Looks like this will possibly be presented at next week's meeting: https://github.com/tc39/agendas/blob/master/2017/07.md

@littledan

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@littledan

littledan Jul 21, 2017

Member

I put myself up as backup champion. If @bterlson doesn't end up presenting it as he mentioned above, I will, to get things moving. But, to be clear, I'm more than happy to have @bterlson and @rbuckton taking this on.

Member

littledan commented Jul 21, 2017

I put myself up as backup champion. If @bterlson doesn't end up presenting it as he mentioned above, I will, to get things moving. But, to be clear, I'm more than happy to have @bterlson and @rbuckton taking this on.

@bterlson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bterlson

bterlson Jul 21, 2017

Member

@gilbert can you transfer this repository to TC39? First transfer to me and then I can transfer to the TC39 organization.

Member

bterlson commented Jul 21, 2017

@gilbert can you transfer this repository to TC39? First transfer to me and then I can transfer to the TC39 organization.

@bterlson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bterlson

bterlson Jul 21, 2017

Member

Also interesting to people in this thread: https://github.com/rbuckton/proposal-partial-application

Member

bterlson commented Jul 21, 2017

Also interesting to people in this thread: https://github.com/rbuckton/proposal-partial-application

@gilbert

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gilbert

gilbert Jul 21, 2017

Collaborator

@bterlson Transfer requested.

Collaborator

gilbert commented Jul 21, 2017

@bterlson Transfer requested.

@babakness

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@babakness

babakness Jul 21, 2017

This is awesome... I have to admit that looking at it I wonder... so if we have syntax sugar for pipe, why not compose too? So a <| operator as well as the |> operator. It just feels more complete with both.

Compose is more natural when thinking about components, because the outer contains the inner, i.e.:

outerComponent <| middleComponent <| innerComponent

babakness commented Jul 21, 2017

This is awesome... I have to admit that looking at it I wonder... so if we have syntax sugar for pipe, why not compose too? So a <| operator as well as the |> operator. It just feels more complete with both.

Compose is more natural when thinking about components, because the outer contains the inner, i.e.:

outerComponent <| middleComponent <| innerComponent

@gilbert

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gilbert

gilbert Jul 21, 2017

Collaborator

@babakness I think it's best to discuss that in a separate issue.

Collaborator

gilbert commented Jul 21, 2017

@babakness I think it's best to discuss that in a separate issue.

@bterlson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bterlson

bterlson Jul 21, 2017

Member

@babakness @rbuckton is thinking about exactly this, perhaps he can provide more details. I agree with a separate issue though, good future extension.

Member

bterlson commented Jul 21, 2017

@babakness @rbuckton is thinking about exactly this, perhaps he can provide more details. I agree with a separate issue though, good future extension.

@bterlson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bterlson

bterlson Jul 24, 2017

Member

@gilbert I'm very very sorry, I missed the transfer request window :( Can you send again? I'll be available for the next ~7 hours to accept it.

Member

bterlson commented Jul 24, 2017

@gilbert I'm very very sorry, I missed the transfer request window :( Can you send again? I'll be available for the next ~7 hours to accept it.

@gilbert

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gilbert

gilbert Jul 24, 2017

Collaborator

@bterlson No problem, sent again.

Collaborator

gilbert commented Jul 24, 2017

@bterlson No problem, sent again.

@bterlson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bterlson

bterlson Jul 24, 2017

Member

@gilbert done :)

Member

bterlson commented Jul 24, 2017

@gilbert done :)

@Alexsey

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Alexsey

Alexsey Aug 4, 2017

Is there anything else need to be done before adding this to https://github.com/tc39/proposals/blob/master/stage-0-proposals.md ?

Alexsey commented Aug 4, 2017

Is there anything else need to be done before adding this to https://github.com/tc39/proposals/blob/master/stage-0-proposals.md ?

@littledan

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@littledan

littledan Aug 4, 2017

Member

It has to be discussed at the meeting. I put it on the agenda for the last meeting, but we ran out of time. We'll see if we can discuss it next time.

Member

littledan commented Aug 4, 2017

It has to be discussed at the meeting. I put it on the agenda for the last meeting, but we ran out of time. We'll see if we can discuss it next time.

@Alexsey

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Alexsey

Alexsey Oct 2, 2017

It finally gets to the proposals repo, and not just on stage 0, but directly to stage 1! Thank you @bterlson and other champions who take this proposal from making it happened! I think issue may be closed now

Alexsey commented Oct 2, 2017

It finally gets to the proposals repo, and not just on stage 0, but directly to stage 1! Thank you @bterlson and other champions who take this proposal from making it happened! I think issue may be closed now

@TehShrike

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TehShrike

TehShrike Oct 2, 2017

Collaborator

👏 🎉 👏

Collaborator

TehShrike commented Oct 2, 2017

👏 🎉 👏

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment