- From: Brendan Eich <brendan@secure.meer.net>
- Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:57:10 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Mike Samuel <mikesamuel@gmail.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Mike Samuel<mikesamuel@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2013/3/14 Ian Hickson<ian@hixie.ch>:
>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2013, Mike Samuel wrote:
>>>> Here's an implementation of Ian's E4H proposal on top of string templates
>>> It seems to miss one of the most important features in E4H, the
>>> compile-time syntax checking.
>> Yeah. It's not an early error. I still don't understand why that's
>> so important.
>
> Because if it's *guaranteed* to be a run-time error (and it is), then
> it's better if it can be detected at compile-time instead. Why wait
> to throw an error until that particular code-path actually gets
> tickled?
Depending on what goes in the ${...} holes, though, the failure might
necessarily be runtime. Error is enough, and a sometimes-compile-time,
other-times-runtime error can be worse. In my experience, anyway.
/be
Received on Thursday, 14 March 2013 23:57:36 UTC