00:14:03  * Fishrock123quit (Remote host closed the connection)
00:46:37  * chicoxyzzyjoined
00:51:02  * chicoxyzzyquit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
01:04:22  * Fishrock123joined
01:08:32  * Fishrock123quit (Remote host closed the connection)
01:48:36  * chicoxyzzyjoined
01:59:12  * Qriajoined
01:59:55  <Qria>Hi, I'm trying to conditionally set a key, and came up with this solution using a spread operator: (https://jsbin.com/gixedodoqi/edit?js ) (this does not work in jsbin, i used https://babeljs.io/repl/ to actually run it) But my coworker points out that {...false} evaluating to {} is an undefined behavior in that [...false] is an error, and that the behavior
01:59:55  <Qria>may change. Is this true?
02:03:29  <not-an-aardvark>Yes, I'm pretty sure ({...false}) is supposed to throw an error
02:04:59  <Qria>ah I see
02:05:05  * chicoxyzzyquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
02:06:44  <not-an-aardvark>Actually I might be wrong
02:06:57  <Qria>Then is there a good way to conditionally apply spread operators? If {...false} was allowed I would have used `{...condition && obj}`
02:07:03  <Qria>oh?
02:07:44  <not-an-aardvark>Based on https://tc39.github.io/proposal-object-rest-spread/#AbstractOperations-CopyDataProperties it seems like ({...false}) enumerates the own keys of `new Boolean(false)`, but there are no such keys
02:07:58  <not-an-aardvark>so it would just end up not modifying the object.
02:08:34  <not-an-aardvark>I'm not sure about this, so maybe it would be better to wait for someone who knows what they're talking about
02:08:52  <Qria>oh, okay I will wait
02:25:15  <Qria>I spun up an issue just in case https://github.com/tc39/proposal-object-rest-spread/issues/45
02:37:52  * bradleymeckquit (Quit: bradleymeck)
03:02:20  * chicoxyzzyjoined
03:06:28  * chicoxyzzyquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
03:07:13  <ljharb>it should do exactly what Object.assign does.
03:07:28  <ljharb>which means it should be a noop.
03:09:18  <ljharb>answered on the issue.
03:09:21  <ljharb>Qria: ^
03:10:16  <Qria>Nice, thanks for answering!
03:12:25  <ljharb>np
03:13:30  <Qria>should I close the issue?
03:15:04  <Qria>I closed the issue
03:17:14  <ljharb>yes, please :-) thanks
04:04:46  * jmdyckquit (Quit: Leaving.)
04:04:55  * chicoxyzzyjoined
04:17:34  * bradleymeckjoined
04:22:05  * chicoxyzzyquit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
04:56:17  * Fishrock123joined
05:02:57  * Fishrock123quit (Quit: Leaving...)
05:25:44  * bradleymeckquit (Quit: bradleymeck)
05:29:20  * chicoxyzzyjoined
05:31:06  * bradleymeckjoined
05:36:59  * bradleymeckquit (Quit: bradleymeck)
06:20:11  * chicoxyzzyquit (Remote host closed the connection)
07:05:28  * chicoxyzzyjoined
07:08:57  * chicoxyz_joined
07:11:03  * chicoxyzzyquit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
07:28:32  * chicoxyz_quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
07:30:18  * gskachkovquit (Quit: gskachkov)
07:31:11  * gskachkovjoined
07:31:34  * gskachkovquit (Client Quit)
08:26:39  * gskachkovjoined
08:30:36  * gskachkovquit (Client Quit)
08:31:23  * gskachkovjoined
08:31:25  * gskachkovquit (Client Quit)
08:32:09  * gskachkovjoined
09:15:32  * not-an-aardvarkquit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
10:26:02  * mylesborinsquit (Quit: farewell for now)
10:26:32  * mylesborinsjoined
11:13:04  <littledan>Is getter/setter coalescing for decorators (step 22 of http://tc39.github.io/proposal-decorators/#sec-runtime-semantics-classdefinitionevaluation ) supposed to be based not just on [[Key]] but also [[IsStatic]]?
11:39:12  * gskachkovquit (Quit: gskachkov)
12:00:57  * jmdyckjoined
12:45:14  * Qriaquit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
14:32:11  * Fishrock123joined
14:42:29  * not-an-aardvarkjoined
14:44:03  * chicoxyzzyjoined
15:08:30  * chicoxyz_joined
15:09:27  * chicoxyzzyquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
16:04:43  * chicoxyzzyjoined
16:06:48  * chicoxyz_quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
16:07:06  * chicoxyzzyquit (Remote host closed the connection)
16:09:53  * chicoxyzzyjoined
16:11:18  * chicoxyzzyquit (Remote host closed the connection)
16:18:34  * chicoxyzzyjoined
16:26:59  * chicoxyzzyquit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
16:27:14  * gskachkovjoined
16:32:51  * chicoxyzzyjoined
16:44:19  * chicoxyz_joined
16:45:38  * chicoxyzzyquit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
16:52:16  * chicoxyz_quit (Remote host closed the connection)
16:58:32  * caridyjoined
17:02:41  * caridy_quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
17:09:23  * abernixjoined
17:09:27  * abernixquit (Client Quit)
17:53:19  <ljharb>littledan: the [[key]] would be on a different object, are instance items and static items processed in the same batch?
19:19:53  * basicdaysquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
19:25:31  * caridyquit (Remote host closed the connection)
19:26:03  * caridyjoined
19:26:20  * basicdaysjoined
19:29:39  <littledan>ljharb: Looks like both static and non-static things get put on the same _elements_ list
20:00:41  * Fishrock123quit (Remote host closed the connection)
20:07:31  * Fishrock123joined
20:18:25  <ljharb>ah, then it definitely seems like it'd need to pivot on both
21:24:38  * tcarejoined
22:22:16  * caridyquit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
22:23:38  * caridyjoined
22:47:05  * Fishrock123quit (Remote host closed the connection)
23:10:16  * Fishrock123joined
23:27:12  * Fishrock123quit (Quit: Leaving...)
23:32:56  <bterlson>https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/919
23:33:07  <bterlson>wherein I make algorithm conventions actually understandable? :-P