| 14:55 | <devsnek> | this is definitely not confusing https://gc.gy/54408295.png |
| 16:33 | <gibson042> | O_O |
| 16:42 | <gibson042> | I don't see an easy refactoring, though |
| 17:03 | <devsnek> | gibson042: we should letter duplicate productions |
| 17:04 | <devsnek> | Statement_a and Statement_b |
| 17:04 | <devsnek> | I was thinking of diving into ecmarkup at some point to do that |
| 17:42 | <jmdyck> | like https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/1768 ? |
| 17:50 | <devsnek> | yep |
| 17:51 | <devsnek> | anyone know a way i can make it so whenever someone pushes to ecma262 it opens an issue in another repo |
| 18:55 | <devsnek> | engine262 has its own regexp parser and engine now 🎉 |
| 21:40 | <devsnek> | does this bother anyone else "If the code matching the syntactic production that is being evaluated is contained in strict mode code, let strict be true; else let strict be false." |
| 21:40 | <devsnek> | in ResolveBinding |
| 21:42 | <jmdyck> | Yeah, "the syntactic production that is being evaluated" isn't well-defined. |
| 21:44 | <jmdyck> | There presumably could be multiple (nested) nodes that are in the process of being evaluated. |
| 21:44 | <jmdyck> | Also, you don't evaluate a production. |
| 21:45 | <jmdyck> | Also, the phrasing of "is contained in strict mode code" is odd. Why not just say "is strict mode code"? |
| 21:46 | <jmdyck> | (I've got some WIP somewhere about the last, I think.) |
| 21:49 | <devsnek> | ResolveBinding needs to take a strict parameter |
