| 02:33 | <TabAtkins (Vacation until May)> | FYI, I'm on vacation until nearly the end of the month. |
| 15:05 | <Duncan MacGregor> | Does anybody know if there is something in test262 covering the ordering of the steps in sec-function-calls-runtime-semantics and sec-evaluatecall, specifically resolving if ref, then evaluating the arguments, and then checking if the func is an function? |
| 15:06 | <Duncan MacGregor> | I couldn't find anything, and was surprised, and I thought it would be a good idea to check with everybody before trying to write a PR for this. |
| 15:43 | <bakkot> | Duncan MacGregor one way to check is to take engine262, run test262, then modify engine262 to have the wrong semantics and see if any tests start failing |
| 15:43 | <bakkot> | modifying engine262 for that sort of thing is usually trivial |
| 16:10 | <Duncan MacGregor> | bakkot: I'll give that a go, it should be trivial to make that change, nad see what breaks. I think that even if it does break something I may still submit something new for test262 that is more obivously tied those parts of the spec. |