00:02:00  * isHavvyquit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
00:09:53  * jwaldenquit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
00:12:14  * jwaldenjoined
00:18:38  * Jayfluxquit (Quit: Leaving)
00:22:27  * caridyquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
00:23:08  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
00:24:41  * caridyjoined
00:24:50  * keith_millerjoined
00:43:17  * AtumTquit (Remote host closed the connection)
00:47:05  * caridyquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
01:18:01  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
01:24:34  * keith_millerjoined
01:27:52  * jwaldenquit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
01:38:23  * Havvyjoined
02:03:42  * keith_millerquit (Remote host closed the connection)
02:05:14  * keith_millerjoined
02:05:48  * keith_millerquit (Remote host closed the connection)
02:06:16  * keith_millerjoined
02:29:28  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
02:39:08  * bradleymeckjoined
02:44:28  * bradleymeckquit (Quit: bradleymeck)
02:48:51  * keith_millerjoined
02:53:02  * keith_millerquit (Client Quit)
03:06:37  * howdoiquit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
03:34:19  * srl295quit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
04:38:34  * keith_millerjoined
04:47:41  * jmdyckquit (Remote host closed the connection)
04:49:23  * caridyjoined
04:50:03  * caridyquit (Remote host closed the connection)
04:50:40  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
04:59:57  * keith_millerjoined
05:26:20  * gibson042quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
05:44:33  * gskachkovquit (Quit: gskachkov)
05:52:40  * jwaldenjoined
05:53:31  * jwaldenquit (Client Quit)
05:53:52  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
07:31:36  * keith_millerjoined
08:03:30  * howdoijoined
08:55:12  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
09:21:59  * not-an-aardvarkquit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
10:43:56  * AtumTjoined
11:25:10  * mylesborinsquit (Quit: farewell for now)
11:25:41  * mylesborinsjoined
11:33:16  * gskachkovjoined
11:58:00  * keith_millerjoined
12:21:00  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
12:30:45  * keith_millerjoined
13:01:51  * jmdyckjoined
14:08:13  * bradleymeckjoined
14:21:01  * gibson042joined
15:20:03  * AtumT_joined
15:22:18  * AtumTquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
15:22:33  * bradleymeckquit (Quit: )
15:22:59  * bradleymeckjoined
15:27:26  <bradleymeck>has anyone seen conversations in the past about collection convenience methods for `if (!x.has(y)) { x.set(y, x); } x.get(y)` / `x.set(y, map(x.get(y)) ) `? I don't even have good names for these operations and have been looking in other languages as well.
15:30:31  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
15:32:56  * AtumTjoined
15:33:15  * keith_millerjoined
15:33:35  * AtumT_quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
15:38:50  * gskachkovquit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
15:50:29  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
16:13:29  <jmdyck>bterlson, Domenic: There's some stuff in async-iter that's clearly wrong, but I'm not sure what it should be.
16:16:58  * bradleymeckquit (Quit: bradleymeck)
16:20:51  * keith_millerjoined
16:59:56  * STRMLquit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in)
17:00:24  <jschoi>If Contains is alone among the Static Semantic Rules in that it is written as an infix operator, while other SSRs are prefix operators, then does that mean it is also the only SSR that operates on more than one parameter?
17:05:45  <jmdyck>no, e.g. ContainsUndefinedContinueTarget has 2 params.
17:07:10  <jmdyck>Also, UTF16Decode has 2 params, but you might not call that an SSR
17:12:06  <jschoi>Thanks! A directory of all SSRs someday could be useful...
17:12:42  <jmdyck>bterlson is probably working on it
17:13:12  <jschoi>That would be great. 👍🏻
17:17:25  <TabAtkins>bradleymeck: See "setdefault()" in Python, for example.
17:32:49  * bradleymeckjoined
17:52:00  <bterlson>jmdyck: let me help, what are you looking at?
17:56:30  * caridyjoined
17:57:10  <jmdyck>If you scan for "OfBodyEvaluation.*async", you get 3 lines. In each, the _iterationKind_ param is missing.
17:57:33  <jmdyck>I wasn't sure what it should be, but then convinced myself it should be ~iterate~.
18:08:54  <bterlson>jmdyck: ok I'll try to look during this meeting, I bet you're right
18:09:24  <bterlson>jmdyck: also, I really like "scan for" as a verb to mean use a regexp (vs. search literal text)
18:09:29  <bterlson>I am stealing this
18:09:45  <jmdyck>be my guest
18:40:31  <jmdyck>ok, i think i've finished my analysis, now to make the commits.
19:04:06  <jmdyck>Oh, one other thing I wasn't sure about:
19:04:53  <jmdyck>in the Evaluation semantics for YieldExpression : `yield` `*` AssignmentExpression
19:05:12  <jmdyck>at the very bottom of the algorithm,
19:05:37  <jmdyck>the last two steps each has a reference to _innerResult_
19:06:32  <jmdyck>but I don't think _innerResult_ is guaranteed to be defined at those points.
19:07:01  <jmdyck>so I'm thinking they should be _innerReturnResult_ instead
19:36:20  <jmdyck>ok, commits done.
19:50:59  * jwaldenjoined
20:50:15  <bterlson>jmdyck: nice work! Sorry I went away, your search example repro'd a vscode bug I've been trying to demo for a long time :-P
20:50:25  <bterlson>I think GetIterator should have an assert about what hint will be
20:51:02  <jmdyck>"OfBodyEvaluation.*async" reproduced a bug?
20:51:41  <bterlson>it is likely unrelated but after doing that search my two-finger scroll performance tanked horribly
20:54:03  <jmdyck>I'm sort of neutral on asserting what _hint_ should be, since I think operations should have param decls with types, which would do away with such assertions.
20:54:44  <jmdyck>would you insert the assertion after the first step?
20:56:45  <bterlson>makes the most sense to me
20:57:06  <bterlson>agree that type decls in the header would be nice in a lot of cases though
20:57:11  <bterlson>seems longer term fix ;)
20:58:03  <jmdyck>longer term than "right now", yes.
20:59:24  <bterlson>jmdyck what's the base commit for the #2 PR?
21:01:10  <jmdyck>the tip of domenic/async-iter
21:02:06  <jmdyck>201f9cd0433d71fbda1caf54a9f18ed79f52c645 i think
21:02:13  <bterlson>ok
21:02:25  <bterlson>there's some gitfu I can do to move all these commits
21:02:51  <jmdyck>why not just merge the PR?
21:03:00  <jmdyck>or cherry-pick the range?
21:03:43  <bterlson>ahh yeah merging the PR is the right way
21:03:46  <bterlson>forgot how github worked
21:03:50  <jmdyck>heh
21:04:03  <bterlson>but actually I don't have perms to merge so
21:04:19  <jmdyck>you can cherry-pick but you can't merge?
21:04:45  <bterlson>it's just a UI thing, in git I can push to that branch but github doesn't know that I guess?
21:05:17  <jmdyck>[blank look]
21:05:31  <bterlson>I get no green merge button
21:05:48  <jmdyck>the nerve.
21:07:30  <jmdyck>well, whatever works
21:07:39  <bterlson>cherry pick range is doing a weird thing
21:07:45  <bterlson>and applying the commits in a weird order
21:08:08  <jmdyck>well, they're mostly order-independent
21:08:21  <jmdyck>but not quite
21:08:31  <bterlson>the not quite gave me merge conflicts
21:08:33  <bterlson>dumb ones
21:08:55  <jmdyck>what was your git command?
21:09:12  <bterlson>git cherry-pick 1149b14..fcb0a72
21:09:36  <bterlson>I did not google to see if I was doing it right fwiw
21:10:27  <jmdyck>that misses my first 2 commits, i think. had you already picked them?
21:11:12  <bterlson>oh, no
21:11:24  <bterlson>some commits on the main page are elided it seems
21:12:17  <jmdyck>oh, that's odd, the pr page has them out of order.
21:12:47  <bterlson>git cherry-pick 5490d34..fcb0a72 should work?
21:13:11  <jmdyck>doesn't that omit the commit at 549?
21:13:21  <bterlson>yes it does
21:13:49  <jmdyck>I think you want 201f9cd..fcb0a72
21:14:08  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
21:14:09  <bterlson>here's a new error
21:14:16  <bterlson>error: unable to create file spec.html: Permission denied
21:14:16  <bterlson>fatal: cherry-pick failed
21:14:23  <jmdyck>ooo
21:15:26  * keith_millerjoined
21:19:25  <bterlson>jmdyck: seems good enough to merge and snap es2018 yeah?
21:19:35  <bterlson>we can still fix editorial stuff and even minor bugs
21:19:48  <jmdyck>i do have more editorial goop.
21:20:15  <jmdyck>but snapping for normative/substantive, sure.
21:21:03  <bterlson>caridy and I were going to announce the snap tomorrow (for 402 as well). If it's something you'd get to today I am happy to put the gitwork off to tomorrow morning.
21:21:21  <bterlson>otherwise I am happy to do the integration work
21:21:23  <bterlson>up to you
21:22:07  <jmdyck>yeah, I've got one thing i can do today.
21:22:23  <bterlson>sounds good, no prob
21:25:06  <bterlson>gonna go get an early start on valentines cooking but I'll be somewhat around
21:25:29  <bterlson>godspeed ecmanauts
21:26:36  <jmdyck>domenic/async-iter looks good (got all my commits + your assert)
21:29:52  <jmdyck>btw, the editorial i have in mind affects async-iter (among others), so would be good to have that merged.
21:30:50  <jmdyck>(or i suppose i could base it on domenic/async-iter, because that should be the tip of master after merge)
21:31:39  * bradleymeckquit (Quit: bradleymeck)
21:52:45  * not-an-aardvarkjoined
21:53:22  * bradleymeckjoined
22:42:57  * bradleymeckquit (Quit: bradleymeck)
22:43:14  <jwalden>leobalter: oddly enough, I kinda think you weren't wrong in the original criticism, even if I'm happy to see the patch landed :-)
22:43:52  <jwalden>leobalter: the existing wording doesn't really clearly say that 2**-1074 is an unacceptable approximation of 2**-2147483648, because it doesn't clarify acceptable error bounds at all
22:44:04  <jwalden>maybe it should, but it doesn't really, right now
22:48:34  * bradleymeckjoined
22:48:48  * caridyquit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
22:49:14  * caridyjoined
22:51:16  * bradleymeckquit (Client Quit)
23:19:14  * STRMLjoined
23:24:14  * STRMLquit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in)
23:29:25  <jschoi>Was there any particular reason why `=>` requires a LHS, and `(=> 3)` is invalid?
23:29:42  <jschoi>Searching on es-discuss and the web didn’t give much insight.
23:31:10  <bterlson>IIRC it was concern around adding an ASI hazard
23:31:14  <bterlson>jschoi: see also https://bterlson.github.io/headless-arrows/
23:31:33  <jschoi>Thanks!
23:31:41  <jschoi>Somehow missed this proposal...
23:31:53  <bterlson>I never really brought this up, I think I just tweeted it
23:32:50  <jschoi>Haha, nice. This is something relevant to one I’m writing, too...
23:35:20  * STRMLjoined
23:37:13  * STRMLquit (Client Quit)
23:39:50  * keith_mi_joined
23:39:55  * STRMLjoined
23:40:17  * STRMLquit (Client Quit)
23:42:15  * keith_millerquit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
23:45:33  * STRMLjoined
23:50:37  <not-an-aardvark>Is there a reason that ES2015 required a variable declared with `const` to have an initializer? (In contrast, languages like Java allow `final` variables without initializers, raising a static error if the variable can be assigned more than once.)
23:52:34  <TabAtkins>not-an-aardvark: Without an initializer it would just be set to `undefined`, with no way to change it...
23:53:32  <not-an-aardvark>The semantics I had in mind would make it a TDZ error to reference it before the assignment.
23:55:25  <not-an-aardvark>That is what Java does (as a compile-time error), although I suppose that would be inconsistent with the default assignment to `undefined` when using other types of declarations.
23:55:38  <littledan>Domenic: Don't you have the same problem for algorithm names?
23:55:39  <TabAtkins>I mean, I'm for anything that lets me conditionally set a `const` without using an IIAFE.
23:56:03  <Domenic>littledan: yes, that's why in Bikeshed they're scoped :)
23:56:20  <Domenic>But yes, in ES, abstract ops live in a giant global namespace. You'd just kind of hope that method/field names did not.