Skip to content

Conversation

@michaelficarra
Copy link
Member

Three independent but related changes. I recommend reviewing as individual commits. I'm not sure about the status of the final commit, whether that was just a missed intention (and therefore can be handled by the editors) or would require consensus. Looking to get more insight from @syg at editor call.

@michaelficarra michaelficarra added the editor call to be discussed in the next editor call label Oct 3, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2025

The rendered spec for this PR is available at https://tc39.es/ecma262/pr/3700.

@bakkot bakkot added ready to merge Editors believe this PR needs no further reviews, and is ready to land. and removed editor call to be discussed in the next editor call labels Oct 6, 2025
@bakkot
Copy link
Member

bakkot commented Oct 6, 2025

Editors believe the normative change was intended to be included in the BigInt PR, since it was in the proposal spec text (at the very bottom). As such, while it is a normative change, we believe it has consensus already and so does not need to come back to committee.

Also it's pretty much unimaginable that this could have been violated.

@michaelficarra
Copy link
Member Author

@ljharb Please add all 3 commits in this PR individually, do not squash.

@walkerheathr24-rgb

This comment was marked as spam.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ready to merge Editors believe this PR needs no further reviews, and is ready to land.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants