Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 25, 2022. It is now read-only.

Normative Optional: Add WeakRef.prototype.constructor #133

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 4, 2019

Conversation

littledan
Copy link
Member

Fixes #131

@littledan
Copy link
Member Author

<p>This property has the attributes { [[Writable]]: *false*, [[Enumerable]]: *false*, [[Configurable]]: *true* }.</p>

<emu-note type="editor">
This section is to be treated identically to the "Annex B" of ECMA-262, but to be written in-line with the main specification.
Copy link
Member

@ljharb ljharb Jun 4, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can you elaborate on this conclusion? I’m a bit confused how “reform” seems like just an alternative editorial form of the same semantics.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The idea here is to put Annex B inline to make it easier to read. We do this in ECMA-402. We discussed this earlier today in the TC39 meeting; delegates can see the draft notes. Do you have any concerns with this idea?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems fine, but that's a pretty massive editorial change discussed with no editors present, and wasn't what I expected from a slideless presentation called "reform".

Reviewing the notes gives me a bit more clarity, but I'd still hope to see a few examples of inline normative optional land in the main spec before a proposal added one (that shouldn't block this PR ofc)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, the plan is that I'll file an issue in ecma262 describing the plan, and we'll work from there in PRs. This PR can be thought of as a really early first draft, editorially; we just need to get it off the ground here and have the observable semantics specified.

@@ -8,6 +8,19 @@
copyright: proposal
contributors: Dean Tribble, Till Schneidereit, Sathya Gunasekaran
</pre>
<style>
[normative-optional] {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you send me a screenshot of how the normal optional text below gets rendered with these stylings?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

image

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Excellent! I am all in favor. Thanks.

@littledan
Copy link
Member Author

OK, I'm landing this PR, since it's an important semantic to get right by Stage 3, and it's had some review here.

@littledan littledan merged commit 1465c3c into master Jun 4, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add WeakRef.prototype.constructor
3 participants