Andy Wingo (2014-06-20T08:48:27.000Z)
dignifiedquire at gmail.com (2014-06-23T17:45:08.698Z)
> On Thu 19 Jun 2014 18:02, "Mark S. Miller" <erights at google.com> writes: > > Yes. For both strict and sloppy, for both static/literal and > dynamic/computed, duplicate property names/symbols in object literals > are no longer an error. Instead, in left-to-right order, each cause the > equivalent of a [[DefineOwnProperty]] on the new object, so that > rightward definitions silently overwrite conflicting leftward > definitions. This should not result in any change to sloppy literals. It > just makes strict literals, regarding this issue alone, act like sloppy > literals. (Once we have a way to express that a property is to be > initialized to a non-configurable state, we'll need to revisit this. But > that's after ES6.) There is one change: ```js ({ foo: 3, get foo() { return 4 } }) ``` This is not allowed with current sloppy mode. Are you proposing that it be allowed, given that this situation may arise with computed property names: ```js ({ ['foo']: 3, get foo() { return 4 } }) ``` or ``` ({ foo: 3, get ['foo']() { return 4 } }) ``` Andy