I eat from a dogbowl. YouTube video by Juan Nicolon

Hope this helps!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwDG...

it do be like that sometimes

Big if true

Nice.

The committee is very cautious about taking public stances. The TC39 FAQ has disclaimers that answers are not endorsed by the committee, and it can still be difficult to get a PR merged. The clearest signals tend to be what can be inferred from proposal advancement.

Schrödinger's Border. The answer depends entirely on whether the observer is inside or outside of it.

Expressing type information in comments is one possibility. Another possibility is type syntax that is part of the language grammar, but type information would be erased, with no runtime checking; its semantics would live entirely in tooling, with no runtime meaning.

"The strong demand for ergonomic type annotation syntax has led to forks of JavaScript with custom syntax. This has introduced developer friction and means widely-used JS forks have trouble coordinating with TC39 and must risk syntax conflicts."

The only thing that TC39 has consensus on is exploring solutions to this problem:

<Promise>.status I don't know why we can't synchronously read the status of a promise. I would imagine it would be very useful in a bunch of scenarios. Right now this is what has to be done function state(p) { con...

es.discourse.group/t/promise-st...

Synchronous promise inspection Finally came across a case in spec discussions where synchronous promise inspection would be extremely valuable: Watcher simplification · Issue #222 · tc39/proposal-signals · GitHub It'd be extremely...

es.discourse.group/t/synchronou...

We do these things not because they are easy, but because we thought they would be easy.

maybe the real JavaScripts were the friends we made along the way

Proposal is withdrawn · Issue #394 · tc39/proposal-record-tuple At yesterday's TC39 plenary (14th April 2025) consensus was achieved to withdraw the Records and Tuples proposal. The proposal was at stage 2 and unable to gain further consensus for adding new pri...

github.com/tc39/proposa...

never forget

stage added between existing stages 2 and 3

math constant e was suggested

then 2.5 as a simple middle ground

then 2.9 because the new stage was substantively closer to 3 than 2

2.7 was suggested as a compromise, and with a nod toward the previous suggestion of e (which has a value of ~2.7)

🍾

@robpalmer.bsky.social is this inspiration or appropriation? 😆

hello, world