On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Dean Landolt <dean at deanlandolt.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Domenic Denicola wrote:
>> >> org.ecmascript.es6.builtins.iterator?
>> >
>> > You forgot the smiley, or: nooooooooooo!!!!!!
>>
>> Which is why I (not in jest) suggested the third property namespace,
>> for language-defined symbols. ^_^
>
> Why a third namespace when there's the built-in modules that functions
> nicely as our registry?

This suggestion was in the context of "symbol strings", which are just
strings in a separate namespace, rather than the existing concept of
symbols as a unique, empty, frozen object.  With a symbol string,
where you retrieve it from doesn't matter - equality is still based on
the contents.  If you want guaranteed non-conflict with user-space
symbols, you need a third namespace.

~TJ

On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Dean Landolt <dean at deanlandolt.com> wrote:

> Why a third namespace when there's the built-in modules that functions
> nicely as our registry?

This suggestion was in the context of "symbol strings", which are just
strings in a separate namespace, rather than the existing concept of
symbols as a unique, empty, frozen object.  With a symbol string,
where you retrieve it from doesn't matter - equality is still based on
the contents.  If you want guaranteed non-conflict with user-space
symbols, you need a third namespace.