| 03:15 | <sideshowbarker> | looking at https://github.com/mdn/content/pull/6031#pullrequestreview-684402976 |
| 03:17 | <sideshowbarker> | in reviewing MDN patches, I’ve run into cases where MDN article need to describe what happens with calling methods from Date objects that aren’t really dates |
| 03:18 | <sideshowbarker> | https://github.com/mdn/content/pull/5983/files#diff-d108cc0257f7f555256331b7caef09755d17dab85df3a402943865e7338b5b26R138 is another case |
| 03:22 | <sideshowbarker> | in the latest review I suggested wording it as “if the Date object doesn’t represent a valid date” |
| 03:23 | <sideshowbarker> | but I’m wondering if there’s some better way to describe it — I mean, without resorting to talking about internal slots of the object |
| 04:38 | <DerekNonGeneric> | congrats to Jamie Kyle on becoming delegate |
| 04:40 | <ryzokuken> | in the latest review I suggested wording it as “if the Date object doesn’t represent a valid date” |
| 04:40 | <ryzokuken> | Maybe even say "if the Date object doesn't point to a valid instant of time" or something like that... |
| 21:55 | <Jamie Kyle> | DerekNonGeneric: Thanks! |
| 22:13 | <DerekNonGeneric> | knew that rome (tools) recently joining ecma + the sus power bump could only mean one thing; 😉 honestly really excited to see how all next-gen tooling pieces will end up fitting together 😄 |
| 22:26 | <Aki> | the sus power bump was my dopey mistake and it's like impossible to undo |
| 22:28 | <Jamie Kyle> | Thanks! It's been really great lately with the Object.hasOwn() proposal. I'm really impressed by how friendly everything/everyone is today |
| 22:32 | <littledan> | it's a good proposal! |
| 22:34 | <ljharb> | not that we’re mean with a bad proposal tho, hopefully :-p |
| 22:34 | <Jamie Kyle> | Thanks :) I'm hoping to get it to stage 4 soon, it's most of the way there besides getting it unflagged in browsers. Gonna have an update at the next meeting: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1UbbNOjNB6XpMGo1GGwl0b8lVsNoCPPPLBByPYc7i5IY/edit?usp=sharing |
| 22:34 | <littledan> | There's a lot for us to improve about the environment in TC39, but I'm very glad that your experience here has been good. |
| 22:35 | <Jamie Kyle> | Speaking of which, is there anyone at apple who could tell me what the internal status of the feature is? rdar://problem/78782545 |