-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Normative: add async iteration #1066
Conversation
@domenic I think I like keeping them together at the end, personally. I'll be working on reviewing the rest of this text today/tomorrow. |
I have reviewed this from a technical basis. I have a few editorial changes that I will do once I integrate this PR (and will run anything significant by the champions as I do it). Also, Stage 4!! 🥂 |
@bterlson tc39/proposal-async-iteration#124, you might want to include this in the editorial changes you mentinoed. |
In tc39/proposal-async-iteration#124 we recommended adding "async generator" the possible values of FunctionAllocate's parameter "functionKind". Relatedly/if that change is accepted -- you might want to update AsyncGeneratorFunctionCreate line 2 to:
|
There seems to be no demand for alphabetization, so let's go for what makes some sense
This section *does* seem to be alphabetized
(It's debateable whether the latter is correct, but it's certainly more common.)
(There's no such thing as "an exception".)
Alright, I think this is ready for ol' squash-n-merge. But tomorrow morning. Gotta give these commits some time to cool off first. |
Wow, amazing work as always; thank you! |
11 commits at domenic#2 (Putting them in a PR was probably unnecessary if you're just going to cherry-pick, but I like seeing them as a unit.) |
... in 3 invocations of ForIn/OfBodyEvaluation. (I'm *pretty* sure that it has to be ~iterate~, but please check.)
(I don't think _innerResult_ is guaranteed to be set at these points, and it seems like there's more to be done with_innerReturnResult_.)
... to distinguish it from the ~normal~ value that appears in the [[Type]] field of Completion Records, and also to better contrast it with the ~async~ value.
@@ -16961,24 +17218,28 @@ <h1>Runtime Semantics: ForIn/OfHeadEvaluation ( _TDZnames_, _expr_, _iterationKi | |||
1. Return ? EnumerateObjectProperties(_obj_). | |||
1. Else, | |||
1. Assert: _iterationKind_ is ~iterate~. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#1812 suggests this line should probably have been removed in this PR?
This supersedes @zbraniecki's #1063. The individual commits are just to show the delta from that.
One potential question for the editor is the ordering of sections within 25 (Control Abstraction Objects). I went with
but I can also see an argument for keeping the two new sections together, perhaps even after the AsyncFunction Objects section.
(Closes #1063)