Fix GetDisposeMethod to match consensus
#217
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
A preview of this PR can be found at https://tc39.es/proposal-explicit-resource-management/pr/217. |
bakkot
approved these changes
Mar 21, 2024
rbuckton
added a commit
to rbuckton/ecma262
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 21, 2024
|
@bakkot do you imagine this requires consensus, or is it fair to say this is a bugfix intended to match with the existing consensus? |
rbuckton
added
bug
|
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
removed
the
needs-consensus
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
PR #180 reached consensus in the July, 2023 TC39 plenary, but there was a typo in the
GetDisposeMethodAO 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@@asyncDisposeor@@disposeis 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 in rbuckton/ecma262#5.
Fixes #208