-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 60
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Review feedback #345
Comments
Thanks @rkirsling this is great. We'll work through these items. |
Good idea!
This AO is a rename of SamevalueNonNumeric. It was previously nonNumeric because the input is not allowed to be a Number or a BigInt. It is now nonGeneric because the input is even less generic because the parameters can now also not be records or tuples.
Great spot!
I don't think so, this looks like a spec bug. Thanks! |
I haven't complained about "NonGeneric" yet because I don't have a better suggestion, but my review will hopefully include some :-) |
Yeah, that's why I was viewing it as a typo. The generic (i.e. default) path used to be describable as "non-numeric" because the non-generic (i.e. special) paths were specifically numeric, but with R&T we now need to be more abstract than that. |
I think I understand the different perspectives now. I am seeing the word generic as "not specific - can handle any input type". So "nonGeneric" seems correct because the AO is specific, it only handles a subset of types. I can also see "Generic" as being interpreted as "handles a related a class of things" similar to What do we think a better name could be? Maybe |
I would say I think the difficulty lies in trying to name it as if it were an operation with a self-standing reason to exist; from that vantage point, I think the best you could say is |
Main points:
I was quite confused by the
ToString
table until I saw Implicit conversion of record to string throws TypeError #319; if we keep this behavior, we should add a note explaining it.Shouldn't
SameValueNonGeneric
be calledSameValueGeneric
? Seems like a typo.Tuple
[[GetOwnProperty]]
and[[Get]]
are attempting to directly access[[Sequence]]
on a Tuple exotic object instead of going through[[TupleData]]
.Is it intentional that
Record.fromEntries
passes theadder
Abstract Closure directly toAddEntriesFromIterable
whileTuple.from
doesCreateBuiltinFunction
first?Nitpicky editorial stuff:
RecordPropertyDefinitionEvaluation
could use a ? instead of an explicit ReturnIfAbrupt forPropertyName : AssignmentExpression
.In
TupleSequenceAccumulation
, the use ofSpreadElement
seems to align with Array, but there would be less redundancy if we align with Record and useTupleElement : AssignmentExpression | ... AssignmentExpression
instead.Kind of annoying that Tuple's
Evaluation
comes afterTupleSequenceAccumulator
instead of before it, though I see that this too is in alignment with Array instead of Record.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: