Ecosyste.ms: Timeline

Browse the timeline of events for every public repo on GitHub. Data updated hourly from GH Archive.

erights

erights pushed 1 commit to main Agoric/proposal-stabilize

View on GitHub

erights pushed 1 commit to main tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer

View on GitHub

erights pushed 1 commit to main tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer
  • xs implementation need link 5cdb557

View on GitHub

erights pushed 1 commit to main tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer
  • xs implementation need link 8675955

View on GitHub

erights opened an issue on tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer
Order of operations, when to throw or silently do nothing?
Originally: Should trying to write data in an immutable ArrayBuffer via a TypedArray element set throw, even though trying to write out-of-bounds or to a detached ArrayBuffer does not? Should Typ...
erights created a comment on an issue on tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer
In addition to @bakkot 's argument, an additional reason to add this is that there's otherwise(*) no way to make a zero-copy immutable slice of an immutable arrayBuffer. Without `sliceToImmutable`,...

View on GitHub

erights created a comment on an issue on tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer
I find the "Minimize consequences of reasonable surprise" argument the most compelling, so I'm inclined towards including this parameter. This would involve a change to the spec and shim as current...

View on GitHub

erights opened an issue on tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer
Should `transferToImmutable` support a _newByteLength_ argument?
In favor: Least surprise. Minimize consequences of reasonable surprise. If we add this parameter, those who expect it not to be there and don't provide such an argument get what they expect anyway....
erights pushed 1 commit to main tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer

View on GitHub

erights opened a draft pull request on Agoric/agoric-sdk
Markm why 10325 fails
<!-- < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < ☺ v ✰ Thanks for creating a PR! ✰ ☺ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >...
erights created a branch on Agoric/agoric-sdk

markm-why-10325-fails - monorepo for the Agoric Javascript smart contract platform

erights pushed 1 commit to main Agoric/proposal-stabilize

View on GitHub

erights pushed 2 commits to main tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer

View on GitHub

erights opened an issue on Agoric/proposal-stabilize
Path to Stage 4
## Stage 4 * [ ] committee approval * [ ] two implementations * [ ] JavaScriptCore * [ ] SpiderMonkey * [ ] XS * [ ] V8 * [ ] significant in-the-field experience * [ ] ecma2...
erights pushed 1 commit to main Agoric/proposal-stabilize
  • assignment override mistake parity a20dd1f

View on GitHub

erights created a review on a pull request on endojs/endo

View on GitHub

erights opened a pull request on tc39/agendas
Added docs-slides link to Stabilize
erights created a review comment on a pull request on endojs/endo
But, IIUC, given #2624 , none of this may still be necessary, which is why I ask.

View on GitHub

erights created a review on a pull request on endojs/endo

View on GitHub

erights created a review comment on a pull request on endojs/endo
Yes. When a permit is a string which is a typeof name, it means "this field must be a value whose typeof is that string. The only value v for which typeof v === 'undefined' is undefined.

View on GitHub

erights created a review on a pull request on endojs/endo

View on GitHub

erights created a comment on a pull request on endojs/endo
Yes. When a permit is a string which is a `typeof` name, it means "this field must be a value whose `typeof` is that string. The only value `v` for which `typeof v === 'undefined'` is `undefined`.

View on GitHub

erights created a comment on a pull request on endojs/endo
What is the status of this? Is it still needed?

View on GitHub

erights created a comment on a pull request on endojs/endo
Hi @Jack-Works , What is the status of this?

View on GitHub

erights created a review on a pull request on endojs/endo
Now that #2624 is merged, I'm changing to "Request changes". Does #2624 indeed enable this to be simplified? What does it simplify down to?

View on GitHub

erights opened a pull request on tc39/agendas
added link to google slides form
erights created a branch on tc39/agendas

erights-patch-1 - TC39 meeting agendas

erights pushed 1 commit to main tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer

View on GitHub

erights created a review comment on a pull request on ocapn/ocapn
Still seems consistent with the idea that "identity" is not usefully an ocapn concept, but rather useful to only describe expected features of language bindings.

View on GitHub

erights created a review comment on a pull request on ocapn/ocapn
Noting that we do not do this now, at least not always, and might never choose to do so. Though I agree that the meaning of deliverying a message to a non-ocapn-target is outside the meaning of oca...

View on GitHub

Load more