| 10:21 | <littledan> | Bakkot: this mention of async do expressions got some positive feedback. I am wondering how normal do expressions are going. Will we see a specification proposed for Stage 2 any time soon? I am excited about that feature and liked your take. https://twitter.com/littledan/status/1336915541613744130?s=19 |
| 11:00 | <haxjs> | What `async do` returns? A promise? |
| 15:30 | <littledan> | yes |
| 16:41 | <Bakkot> | littledan: I continue to be excited to work on it, and hope to have some time over the winter holidays |
| 17:27 | <littledan> | yay! |
| 17:50 | <Bakkot> | now that I'm looking at my slides again: does anyone have a sense of the web-compat risk of making it so that the completion value of `0; function f(){}` was `f` instead of (as is currently specified) `f`? |
| 17:51 | <Bakkot> | I feel like there is probably not that much code depending on completion values, and quite possibly zero code depending on that particular edge case, right? |
| 17:51 | <Bakkot> | ugh |
| 17:51 | <Bakkot> | that should read "completion value of `0; function f(){}` was `f` instead of (as is currently specified) `0`?" |
| 18:22 | <ljharb> | Bakkot: my sense is "if the world is reasonable, the risk should be almost zero, but <gestures at the world>" |
| 18:23 | <ljharb> | someone would have to be using eval and also using a function declaration that was defined at the bottom, all of which aren't very common. buttttt someone probably is doing that |
| 18:24 | <Bakkot> | not just using eval, but using it for its completion value |
| 19:20 | <ljharb> | right |
| 19:22 | <rkirsling> | #2210 and #2221 should be basically unblocked on tests now, jftr |
| 19:23 | <rkirsling> | (pending https://github.com/tc39/test262/pull/2918 but still) |
| 20:12 | <Bakkot> | rkirsling https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/2210 looks to need a rebase; want to take care of it or shall I? |
| 20:12 | <rkirsling> | oh sure I can |
| 20:12 | <Bakkot> | I expect it's just the ValidateIntegerIndex refactoro |
| 20:12 | <Bakkot> | or whatever that AO is called |
| 20:23 | <rkirsling> | it is yeah |
| 20:24 | <rkirsling> | took me a sec to remember what we changed over there |
| 20:24 | <rkirsling> | but done now |