[08:13:33] caridy: you probably signed with the wrong name or email address? [08:13:44] It has to be the exact one from the git log [08:24:42] I have signed that 3 times already! jejejeje, with via email a long time ago, one more when jquery foundation came onboard, and yesterday. [08:24:47] let me try it again :/ [08:27:30] ok, signed twice again, with ñ and without ñ, you guys can figure it out ;) [08:57:59] thanks caridy we'll figure it out [11:23:35] so...is there a meeting today? :) [11:25:23] I asked in #esprima and got no response [11:25:39] and am surprised that this channel isn't muted; I didn't even think to check [11:28:54] I'm guessing it's cancelled, but I didn't get any notice [11:29:58] mikesherov? [11:30:07] hi [11:30:21] ariya can't make it today [11:30:27] and I got pulled into a meeting [11:30:35] sorry nzakas gibson042 [11:30:43] sorry michaelficarra [11:30:55] Small agenda anyway [11:31:01] let's do it? [11:31:15] I've got 30 minutes, happy to stay [11:31:26] kk [11:31:27] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l02VT94tdphwUUZfPJorRYOY0Q_v41R_TyYhKayiP9M/edit# [11:31:44] I don't want to start if we don't have quorum [11:32:05] michaelficarra: ariya said to go without him [11:32:24] jsoverson ikarienator: are you around? [11:32:49] are they all stuck in the same fire drill? [11:32:51] @michaelficarra i am but am mostly occupied [11:32:59] we'll defer any decisions if necessary michaelficarra [11:33:06] @ikarienator isn't here [11:33:11] progress updates and etc can happen just fine [11:33:44] okay [11:33:48] looks like destructuring is done [11:34:12] caridy: has an open PR for imports [11:34:19] would be great to get some eyes on it [11:35:44] Template Strings still has my open PR [11:35:53] I had some questions, because I got myself confused [11:35:58] perhaps you can answer michaelficarra [11:36:14] inside of template strings: is `\123` valid? [11:36:23] what about `\456`? [11:36:39] meaning are all decimal escape sequences forbidden? [11:37:17] I was confused by this: https://github.com/jquery/esprima/pull/1124#discussion_r26609194 [11:37:37] and it's the only thing holding back template strings at this point, which I'd like to land tonight [11:37:55] those aren't decimal, they're octal [11:38:35] \0 is allowed, as long as it's not followed by a decimal digit [11:39:00] \1 through\9 are never allowed [11:39:07] ok, so: good is: `\0`, `\0a`, .... [11:39:29] yep, those are good [11:39:33] bad is: `\1` - `\9` and `\0(0-9)`? [11:39:50] yes [11:39:57] \0 followed by any number of decimal digits in a row [11:40:05] what about `\09a`? [11:40:08] any single decimal digit [11:40:25] ah, so, `\09a` and `\099` are fine? [11:40:37] no, they are not fine because they both follow \0 with a 9 [11:40:55] I got confused by "any single decimal digit" [11:41:06] as soon as you see a decimal digit following \0, you know you have an error [11:41:12] got it [11:41:16] sorry, it was poor wording choice on my part [11:41:17] that's helpful [11:41:21] no worries [11:41:23] I didn't realise the ambiguity [11:41:45] mikesherov: I think the best way to look at it is that \ + number escapes are not allowed, but an exception is specifically made for unambiguous "\0" [11:42:20] yep [11:42:37] gibson042: thanks [11:42:43] ok, lets move on [11:42:51] no progress on generators or arrow edge cases [11:43:41] would be great gibson042 if you could review the modules code [11:44:10] ok, so moving along: https://github.com/estree/estree/pull/59 [11:44:24] seems as if we are considering adding sourceType property to program node [11:44:42] which is cool with me, and is actually in caridy's modules PR [11:44:52] and I think that means it's also in espree, nzakas ? [11:45:11] yup, though we did it in a separate commit [11:45:11] I think this is a harmless and fine additive change [11:45:16] right [11:45:27] so, just wondering if anyone has major objections to this [11:45:32] agreed [11:45:32] I'll still ask ariya and ikarienator [11:45:43] just wanted to poll the team here [11:46:36] ok, so let's move on then if no one has strong opinions [11:47:09] https://github.com/jquery/esprima/issues/1047#issuecomment-84732463 [11:47:20] gotwarlost has asked us to move up the implementation of for..of [11:47:26] for instanbul [11:47:39] anyone interested in taking this? and us getting it into 2.2? [11:48:39] mikesherov: for-of is not entirely as trivial as it sounds [11:49:03] there's a few extra early errors you have to be careful with [11:49:15] there is an implementation in harmony [11:49:19] which may be broken? [11:49:43] michaelficarra: I have no clue how hard it is [11:49:48] I'm still a layman here. [11:50:01] there are some edge cases, but do we need to be 100% correct to get the ball moving? [11:50:06] the biggest one to remember is `try {} catch(e) { for(var e of []); }` [11:50:30] right, we can start by getting a working implementation that misses some edge cases [11:50:35] as long as they are all documented [11:50:43] also, something related to a variable named let/of on the left of the head [11:50:49] because I think the 90% case is pretty straightforward [11:50:51] okay [11:51:07] for example, we have arrows in 2.1 and it's still got an early errors we're missing [11:51:13] same goes for let/const [11:51:38] destructuring too, I believe [11:52:09] actually no, Bei fixed that [11:52:12] yeah [11:52:23] https://github.com/jquery/esprima/issues/1047 who can fill in the description here: https://github.com/jquery/esprima/issues/1047 [11:52:25] okay then yes, you can get it mostly correct with very little effort [11:52:49] michaelficarra: can you outline the issue? You have the best grasp here of the early errors [11:52:55] so we can document them. [11:53:14] and then perhaps push a base implementation out earlier? [11:53:31] Can't commit just yet, but would love to see someone at least getting the ball rolling there [11:53:40] gibson042: have any availability yet? [11:54:06] probably next week, after I have PRs to jQuery for everything I promised [11:54:21] ok, sounds good, I'll bring it up again next meeting [11:54:39] mikesherov: I'm not sure I'll be able to get around to it in the next week or two [11:55:08] I'm super busy working on the two-phase parsing in Shift :) [11:56:43] michaelficarra: fair enough [11:57:14] OK, I'd like to defer CST discussion and call it a meeting for now [11:57:17] anyone opposed? [11:57:25] definitely not [11:57:26] :) [11:57:32] works for me [11:58:01] pizza time! [11:58:21] Bye! Thanks all!