Kevin Smith

In my early work on "private" methods, I desperately wanted class-scoped function declarations, but there are some parsing issues. Consider this token stream: ``` class X { async function [rest...

It's been a while since I've done any parser work, but I don't think the `static` member parsing requires the additional lookahead: you read off the `static` keyword and then...

@bterlson Thanks for starting this discussion. I think it's very important for TC39 to set some kind of precedent here since platforms (e.g. DOM) will also likely want to start...

Also, the IdentifierName variant ``` js import {float32x4} from SIMD; ``` would be future-hostile to lexical modules, FWIW. And in general, I think it's "lexically surprising" to see an identifier...

Sorry, or ``` js import SIMD from ""; ``` if it exports an default.

If I'm understanding correctly: 1. `Object.keys` has to pull out a property descriptor in order to determine whether the property is enumerable or not. 1. But it can't pull out...

@devsnek Do you have anything that might move this forward? There doesn't seem to be an obvious solution: `Object.keys` requires a fully-realized property descriptor, which is not available when an...

I'm thinking that we should leave things the way they are for now, since `@@` is well-understood, fairly readable, and used by other specs.

I agree with Allen's comment and think that, in general, the use of `%X.Y%` does not result in an overall increase in spec clarity.

Thanks @bsclifton! @emerick also discovered this; a rebase mess-up on my part accidentally removed a couple of lines. Should be all fixed now!