Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

FixGetDisposeMethod to match consensus#217

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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Merged
rbuckton merged 1 commit intomainfromfix-208
Mar 22, 2024
Merged

FixGetDisposeMethod to match consensus#217

rbuckton merged 1 commit intomainfromfix-208
Mar 22, 2024

Conversation

rbuckton
Copy link
Collaborator

@rbucktonrbuckton commentedMar 21, 2024
edited
Loading

PR#180 reached consensus in the July, 2023 TC39 plenary, but there was a typo in theGetDisposeMethod AO that results a normative change that was not intentional nor part of the consensus. It has long been the intent that we should throw early when@@asyncDispose or@@dispose is not found on a resource, but#180 inadvertently lost this requirement. This PR intends to align the proposal text with the actual consensus.

A PR against ecma262 is being tracked inrbuckton/ecma262#5.

Fixes#208

@github-actionsGitHub Actions
Copy link

A preview of this PR can be found athttps://tc39.es/proposal-explicit-resource-management/pr/217.

rbuckton added a commit to rbuckton/ecma262 that referenced this pull requestMar 21, 2024
@rbuckton
Copy link
CollaboratorAuthor

@bakkot do you imagine this requires consensus, or is it fair to say this is a bugfix intended to match with the existing consensus?

@rbucktonrbuckton added bugSomething isn't working needs-consensusA pull request that needs consensus at TC39 plenary normativeIndicates a normative change to the specification labelsMar 22, 2024
@bakkot
Copy link

I think it's fine to call it a bugfix.

If you're presenting anyway you might call it out, but I don't think you need to call for consensus.

rbuckton reacted with thumbs up emoji

@rbucktonrbuckton removed the needs-consensusA pull request that needs consensus at TC39 plenary labelMar 22, 2024
@rbucktonrbuckton merged commit0e10d02 intomainMar 22, 2024
@rbucktonrbuckton deleted the fix-208 branchMarch 22, 2024 20:30
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@bakkotbakkotbakkot approved these changes

@sygsygAwaiting requested review from syg

@michaelficarramichaelficarraAwaiting requested review from michaelficarra

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bugSomething isn't workingnormativeIndicates a normative change to the specification
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Shouldn'tawait using early throw for non-disposable objects?
2 participants
@rbuckton@bakkot

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp