| 02:13 | <Michael Ficarra> | thanks, I responded |
| 05:59 | <ljharb> | any thoughts on https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/3020#issuecomment-1441743282 ? |
| 17:57 | <Michael Ficarra> | yeah I think they're right and the solution is indeed to move the step into the derived path |
| 19:25 | <ljharb> | that was what i was suspecting but i find it hard to believe nobody would have noticed that while implementing class fields |
| 19:30 | <shu> | why is that hard to believe? 🙃 |
| 21:29 | <Rob Palmer> | Is it possible that implementations are inefficient today due to the double init? |
| 21:30 | <shu> | no, looks like no implementations do double init |
| 21:30 | <shu> | purely a spec bug |
| 22:32 | <jmdyck> | Is there a meeting? |
| 22:33 | <Michael Ficarra> | yes |
| 22:35 | <jmdyck> | "Sorry, we encountered a problem joining this video call." |
| 22:38 | <jmdyck> | The URL is the one that ends in pcz? |
| 22:41 | <ljharb> | yes |
| 22:42 | <jmdyck> | then I guess google just doesn't like me any more. |
| 23:00 | <ljharb> | that's very strange. are you logged in to the google account on the invite? |
| 23:00 | <ljharb> | (i'd still expect you to be able to get to it if not, to be clear) |
| 23:01 | <jmdyck> | I don't think I ever got an invite |
| 23:06 | <jmdyck> | Apparently, being logged into google made the difference. |
| 23:07 | <jmdyck> | But I'm pretty sure it hasn't been necessary in the past. |
| 23:14 | <ljharb> | yeah it shouldn't be |
| 23:25 | <Michael Ficarra> | I was logged out when I initially attempted to join, and it let me put a name in and ask to join (I didn't, I logged in, but it would have let me) |
| 23:25 | <jmdyck> | That's normally what I get. |