TC39 Decimal_Measure on 2024-12-19

04:19	<sffc>	Arguably people should be doing unit-ed computations all over the place, but I think that is beyond the scope of measure (initially) I want to put Measure on a path to where it is the main gateway to dimensioned operations in units and currencies. I want it to be integrated with Decimal and the rest of the language, not just an interface to Intl. This is better for developers and better for users in the long run.
04:22	<sffc>	`Intl.NumberFormat.prototype.format` has accepted strings since its inception, but they were converted to Numbers first. The recent proposal I championed kept the status quo except that more nonzero significant digits in the string would be retained. I would have liked to retain trailing zeros, too, but that almost certainly would have broken the Web. The string support in Intl.NumberFormat should therefore not have any direct impact on the design of Decimal or Measure. However, this is a good example of why I want the Measure and Decimal champions to talk more; I don't think we should be developing these proposals in two silos.
04:32	<sffc>	I find Decimal's value proposition stronger if it is part of a holistic design for dimensions in ECMAScript. This would really "level up" numbers in ECMAScript. And it's better for Intl because users who have these structured types floating around can call `toLocaleString` on them and it will just work.
04:36	<sffc>	I really think we should avoid shipping the org chart here. We have two proposals that are both proposing to add new primordials for number-related things. These proposals must be evaluated as part of the bigger picture.
17:39	<littledan>	I don't see any evidence of silo'ing; the champions work at the same company (even if different clients are sponsoring the work) and developed the TC39 presentations together. Doing a design holistically is the plan. That said, if you want to block decimal on having measure be further along in development, I can understand that point of view.
20:58	<sffc>	Happy to hear we're aligned on making a holistic design!
21:41	<littledan>	that said, when you say "I really think we should avoid shipping the org chart", it sounds like a criticism of the design work so far, as if we are on a path to doing that. Do you see that as a property of the proposed designs?