00:00:02  * laughinghanquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
00:11:33  * laughinghanjoined
00:37:52  * AtumTquit (Quit: AtumT)
01:23:27  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
01:41:49  * keith_millerjoined
02:53:23  * howdoiquit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
03:21:40  * vikash-afkjoined
04:51:20  * laughinghanquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
05:25:00  * jmdyckquit (Remote host closed the connection)
06:01:08  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
06:17:12  * kpattichajoined
06:27:26  * gibson042quit (*.net *.split)
06:27:26  * saulh[m]quit (*.net *.split)
06:27:39  * underikarquit (*.net *.split)
06:27:39  * Draggorquit (*.net *.split)
06:37:50  * gibson042joined
06:37:50  * saulh[m]joined
06:38:18  * underikarjoined
06:38:18  * Draggorjoined
07:12:51  * keith_millerjoined
07:13:14  * kpattichaquit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
07:13:59  * keith_millerquit (Client Quit)
07:16:11  * underikarquit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
07:16:38  * underikar_joined
07:51:27  * keith_millerjoined
07:57:03  * Nimelrianjoined
08:24:56  * Nimelrianquit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
09:24:00  * keith_millerquit (Remote host closed the connection)
09:24:46  * keith_millerjoined
09:28:41  * keith_millerquit (Client Quit)
10:05:55  * keith_millerjoined
10:08:02  * kpattichajoined
10:15:16  * kpattichaquit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
10:50:39  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
11:27:00  * keith_millerjoined
12:28:56  * jmdyckjoined
12:50:33  * AtumTjoined
14:46:50  * gibson042quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
19:44:28  * cythrawllquit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
19:47:01  * cythrawlljoined
19:58:15  * ErrorIsNullErrorquit (Quit: Leaving.)
21:59:49  * laughinghanjoined
22:02:06  * laughinghanquit (Client Quit)
22:08:33  * laughinghanjoined
22:32:56  <devsnek>why does everything fail this test https://github.com/tc39/test262/pull/2177/files
22:33:07  <devsnek>even engine262 fails this test, and i can't figure out why
22:35:15  * AtumT_joined
22:37:50  * AtumTquit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
22:48:19  * AtumTjoined
22:48:41  <ljharb>devsnek: they fail an even simpler one: `Reflect.construct(Object, { b: 2 })` matching `new Object({ b: 2 })`
22:49:05  <devsnek>i'm having trouble following why any of these engines fail this though
22:49:24  * AtumT_quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
22:49:27  <ljharb>you mean like, why they're implemented in a way such that it fails?
22:49:39  <devsnek>yeah
22:50:05  <ljharb>my uneducated guess is, Object is legacy, Reflect.construct probably has a bunch of edge case bugs with pre-ES6 builtins
22:50:30  <ljharb>oh wait
22:50:40  <ljharb>`Reflect.construct(Object, [{ b: 2 }])` does work, my bad
22:50:40  <devsnek>doesn't this weird you out
22:51:26  <ljharb>so it's not even Reflect.construct, it's that `extends Object` doesn't seem to work
22:51:49  <ljharb>ie `new class extends Object {} ({ b: 2 }).b === 2` fails
22:52:25  <devsnek>yes
22:58:11  <rkirsling>fwiw `constructor(x) { super(x); }` doesn't help though I guess it'd be even more worrying if it did
23:00:46  * keith_millerquit (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
23:00:59  <devsnek>i legit can't figure out why this doesn't work
23:02:13  <devsnek>rkirsling: that's the default constructor anyway
23:03:33  <devsnek>ugh that reminds me of how annoying this spacing is `constructor(... args){ super (...args);}`
23:03:53  <rkirsling>yeah exactly
23:04:06  <devsnek>did they do that just to annoy people
23:04:16  <rkirsling>wait where is that spacing from?
23:04:19  <devsnek>the spec
23:04:37  <devsnek>https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-runtime-semantics-classdefinitionevaluation
23:04:43  <devsnek>step 10
23:04:58  <rkirsling>oof
23:05:04  <rkirsling>if you don't PR that, I might
23:05:10  <devsnek>i was afraid to
23:05:18  <devsnek>like it might start some battle about styles
23:06:37  <rkirsling>perhaps. that section appears to be unique though
23:07:09  <devsnek>it's the only place in the entire spec that defines builtin behaviour in terms of source code
23:07:36  <devsnek>usually there'd be a builtin function
23:07:36  <rkirsling>yeah I wonder why
23:07:57  <rkirsling>maybe that's the real fix? but I don't have the background / have only looked at this for a few seconds
23:08:15  <devsnek>🤷
23:08:29  <devsnek>i'm still just trying to figure out why engine262 fails this thing
23:08:35  <rkirsling>like even just taking out the spaces there would be acceptable to be
23:08:38  <rkirsling>*to me
23:08:46  <devsnek>just any sort of consistency
23:08:51  <rkirsling>'cause there's `f(){}` elsewhere which is fine
23:09:25  <rkirsling>as well as the note here: https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-declarative-environment-records-setmutablebinding-n-v-s
23:10:02  <devsnek>the code in the string has extra space thouguh
23:10:14  <rkirsling>lol true
23:11:41  <devsnek>ok so in this test
23:11:57  <devsnek>active function is `Object`
23:12:18  <devsnek>`NewTarget` is `O`
23:12:45  <devsnek>so it should return OrdinaryCreateFromConstructor right?
23:13:23  <devsnek>that makes me feel like chakra is wrong and everything else is right
23:13:40  <devsnek>am i reading this wrong
23:24:54  <devsnek>https://gc.gy/405dd6cb-02ea-4795-bfe4-8a484a67d3eb.png
23:45:29  <rkirsling>huh that is interesting
23:45:53  <rkirsling>also #1482 must have containined an ecmarkdown typo
23:46:08  <rkirsling>digging for it now
23:46:19  <rkirsling>*contained even
23:53:06  <rkirsling>lol `<` and... `&rt;`
23:53:20  <devsnek>👍
23:54:20  <rkirsling>oh hm. that was part of it but evidently not all of it.