- From: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2013 00:30:28 +0000
- To: Brendan Eich <brendan@secure.meer.net>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
From: Brendan Eich [mailto:brendan@secure.meer.net] > Extensible Web Manifesto does *not* mean standardizing only block devices > and reinvinting filesystems (poorly) in JS libraries on top! > > Does anyone disagree? > > Also, "syntactic sugar" is for programming languages. "Compound API" is not > the same. But first let's agree that move is not compound, composite, or > sugar. Sorry if I came across too aggressively here, and `move` was clearly wrong-headed, as I explained in another reply. The thing I was trying to communicate was that we needed low-level FS primitives before high-level ones, not that we needed something that was lower-level than a FS at all. (Although, as Brian says, I think that would be quite interesting and useful to developers!)
Received on Sunday, 11 August 2013 00:31:17 UTC