Reviewers
codehag opened this issue · comments
Hi, and congratulations on stage 2!
Because we were rushed, it looks like we missed reviewers for this. I can probably volunteer. Do you have other reviewers?
Thank you! It will be great to have you reviewing the spec.
I believe there isn't anyone who explicitly stands for reviewers. I'd like to appreciate @ljharb for his reviews on the PRs, and I'd appreciate it if he is still interested in reviewing too.
Happy to be a reviewer! We’ll need to confirm reviewers in the next plenary, of course.
I've reviewed it for stage 3, it looks pretty good.
One thing I am not really sure about is the addition of the new abstract operations CreateNonEnumerableDataProperty and InstallErrorCause. They save a total of 4-5 lines, but they add extra checks. I think the goal here was to reduce repetition and make reading easier, but I found the previous version pretty straight forward and maybe a little easier to read than the refactoring. This is a matter of taste. Soft preference for just doing it inline.
I'd asked for the separate AOs since the repetition happened three times and seemed prone to being written and implemented inconsistently. What extra checks are you referring to?
IMO, CreateNonEnumerableDataPropertyOrThrow is intuitive to understand in the context with the precedent CreateDataPropertyOrThrow. For InstallErrorCause, it contains repetive non-common checks (not checking if the options.cause is undefined but if the options.cause is present). It seems to me an AO will help to reduce the chance to be mistaken.
As mentioned, it is more a matter of taste. I am fine with it as is (which is why I didn't open an issue).
Thanks for the review! Closing as there is no open question. Feel free to re-open if needed.