| 13:22 | <devsnek> | if initializing import.meta could fail |
| 13:23 | <devsnek> | like say there's a compartment hook for it |
| 13:23 | <devsnek> | what is a reasonable behaviour for it failing |
| 13:27 | <bradleymeck> | devsnek: probably like how import() failing doesn't need to cache the error, just fire the host hook again and have it fail again |
| 13:27 | <devsnek> | seems scary |
| 13:28 | <bradleymeck> | its just a thrown error I would assume |
| 13:28 | <devsnek> | yeah |
| 13:29 | <bradleymeck> | i don't think it should get a value at least, and import.meta is always an object so, error |
| 13:36 | <devsnek> | yeah just the idea of it throwing multiple times feels weird |
| 13:59 | <bradleymeck> | devsnek: import() returns new rejected promises even if you cache the error |
| 13:59 | <bradleymeck> | you could always add a .then() to all your import.meta objects and await it ;-) |
| 14:00 | <bradleymeck> | .then is such a huge surface these days :-( |
| 17:44 | <jorendorff> | Where can I find the proposal to reduce support for @@Species? |
| 17:58 | <shu> | jorendorff: https://github.com/syg/proposal-rm-builtin-subclassing |
| 18:00 | <jorendorff> | thanks |
| 18:11 | <Bakkot> | can a chair block this user? https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/1376#issuecomment-646777580 |
| 18:11 | <Bakkot> | appears to be automated spam on a few of our repos |
| 18:12 | <Bakkot> | to me, anyway, unless someone else knows otherwise |
| 18:54 | <ljharb> | i reported them, maybe github will take care of it |
| 23:49 | <toddobryan> | I have what may be a really stupid question, but here goes. Why does the lexical grammar even still exist in the spec? |
| 23:53 | <rkirsling> | toddobryan: how do you mean "still"? I think this this summarizes the interacting grammars quite nicely: https://v8.dev/blog/understanding-ecmascript-part-3#ecmascript-grammars |
| 23:53 | <toddobryan> | I've been implementing a parser and, the best I can tell, it's impossible to write a tokenizer. The spec talks about InputElementDiv, InputElementRegExp, InputElementRegexpOrTemplateTail, and InputElementTemplateTail as alternative goals for parsing, but none of them are referenced in later grammars, which use literal symbols extensively. |
| 23:55 | <toddobryan> | The Whitespace production is only referred to in those rules, which, as mentioned, aren't reachable from any of the higher-level symbols like Program and Script. |
| 23:59 | <toddobryan> | @rkirsling That's the thing. You'd expect the syntactic grammar to be written in terms of tokens, but it's not. It's written in terms of characters. |
| 23:59 | <devsnek> | where is it written in terms of characters |