| 15:44 | <Michael Ficarra> | lol |
| 15:48 | <Michael Ficarra> | I'm assuming the terrible thing they're referring to is that they don't have papyrus installed on their computer |
| 17:09 | <shu> | how is it possible someone doesn't have papyrus |
| 17:09 | <shu> | isn't it default |
| 17:14 | <Michael Ficarra> | probably Linux |
| 17:15 | <shu> | this is why the year of linux on the desktop will never come |
| 17:15 | <shu> | papyrus has been around for 5000 years |
| 20:53 | <Richard Gibson> | how would y'all feel about introduction of a Mapping specification type (analogous to the language values produced by new Map(), but no need for key/value/entry enumeration AFAICT) for replacing ECMA-402 record.[[<var>]] abuse of the Record type?https://github.com/tc39/ecma402/pull/984#discussion_r2021261469 |
| 21:03 | <bakkot> | positively |
| 21:09 | <Richard Gibson> | and followup: preferences for such a type being defined in ECMA-262 vs. ECMA-402? |
| 22:35 | <bakkot> | I would leave it in 402 until such time as there's use for it in 262 |
| 22:36 | <bakkot> | Temporal is using the same thing so we could pull it in to 262 as part of landing Temporal |
| 22:36 | <bakkot> | generally we don't like to have stuff in 262 that isn't being used within the document itself |