| 01:16 | <devsnek> | does test262 have coverage for `export { a }; let a` in that order? |
| 01:17 | <devsnek> | i don't think there's such an occurrence in module-code |
| 16:53 | <jmdyck> | waah, rebasing 2007 to master us such a pain |
| 16:54 | <Bakkot> | jmdyck :( |
| 16:54 | <Bakkot> | I can take care of it this evening probably |
| 16:55 | <jmdyck> | tx |
| 16:55 | <jmdyck> | you may want to squash the 13 commits first |
| 17:01 | <devsnek> | is anyone working on moving `__proto__` into the main spec |
| 17:01 | <devsnek> | iirc we have consensus to generally smoosh things from annex b to the main spec? |
| 17:02 | <ljharb> | not everything, but many |
| 17:07 | <bradleymeck> | yea, i think the merging is more about things that are causing differences due to grammar collisions |
| 17:08 | <bradleymeck> | e.g. <!-- comments , mark had a presentation where XS which doesn't support them since they are optional actually evaluated code differently than other engines with same source text |
| 17:12 | <devsnek> | yeah the scary things aside |
| 17:12 | <devsnek> | if there's consensus to move __proto__ I might make a pr |
| 17:58 | <bradleymeck> | i don't want __proto__ to be required as some people state any env that disables/removes ECMA262 builtins to be non-complaint |
| 17:59 | <bradleymeck> | and __proto__ is a rats nest of bugs and I think it is reasonable to disable as a host |
| 17:59 | <devsnek> | bradleymeck: it can be normative optional I guess? |
| 17:59 | <bradleymeck> | sure |
| 18:00 | <Bakkot> | __proto__ in object literals is much more reasonable than the getter/setter |
| 18:00 | <devsnek> | agree with that |
| 18:04 | <devsnek> | could do syntax required, accessor optional |
| 18:04 | <devsnek> | or both optional |
| 18:06 | <bradleymeck> | syntax would need to be required per the grammar concern since it is really special |
| 18:06 | <bradleymeck> | but i don't think anyone is against that |
| 18:06 | <devsnek> | seems reasonable |
| 18:06 | <devsnek> | I'll open a pr at some point before the next meeting I guess |
| 22:34 | <bradleymeck> | trailing comma expressions... `general,; chaos |