4 ms·

It would be more useful if in the version they could use the year that most people will likely have a browser that supports these, rather than the year they wer

by gushie 9y ago

It would be more useful if in the version they could use the year that most people will likely have a browser that supports these, rather than the year they were introduced

michaelmior 9y ago
That seems like it would make it very challenging to assign a version upon release. And there's also the possibility of overlapping versions.
- vitus 9y ago
  Right. While this is an open process, and browser vendors are well aware of these when the spec is announced, the only way to enforce this in a meaningful way would be for all the vendors to coordinate... which I don't exactly see happening. There's no reason for vendors to delay a feature just because their competitors aren't ready yet. As for availability of these two features: stable Chrome supported Array.prototype.includes in Dec 2015 and in Jul 2016; stable Firefox supported these in Dec 2015 and Mar 2017, respectively. I guess you could say that these features were widely available in 2016, _just if you use Chrome_, but that's not a satisfying answer. MDN pages: [0] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/includes#Browser_compatibility https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe... [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Arithmetic_Operators#Browser_compatibility https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe... Dates for corresponding browser versions drawn from the wikipedia pages: [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_version_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_version_history [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome_version_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome_version_history
corv 9y ago
The reason for the year is to shame browser vendors into adding support.
larzang 9y ago
It's honestly pretty irrelevant. Even if management doesn't require you to still support IE11, you're still almost certainly going to have babel in your pipeline, which means you can use brand new features before browsers support them.

by gushie 9y ago

It would be more useful if in the version they could use the year that most people will likely have a browser that supports these, rather than the year they were introduced

michaelmior 9y ago

That seems like it would make it very challenging to assign a version upon release. And there's also the possibility of overlapping versions.

vitus 9y ago
Right. While this is an open process, and browser vendors are well aware of these when the spec is announced, the only way to enforce this in a meaningful way would be for all the vendors to coordinate... which I don't exactly see happening. There's no reason for vendors to delay a feature just because their competitors aren't ready yet. As for availability of these two features: stable Chrome supported Array.prototype.includes in Dec 2015 and in Jul 2016; stable Firefox supported these in Dec 2015 and Mar 2017, respectively. I guess you could say that these features were widely available in 2016, _just if you use Chrome_, but that's not a satisfying answer. MDN pages: [0] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/includes#Browser_compatibility https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe... [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Arithmetic_Operators#Browser_compatibility https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe... Dates for corresponding browser versions drawn from the wikipedia pages: [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_version_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_version_history [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome_version_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome_version_history

corv 9y ago

The reason for the year is to shame browser vendors into adding support.

larzang 9y ago

It's honestly pretty irrelevant. Even if management doesn't require you to still support IE11, you're still almost certainly going to have babel in your pipeline, which means you can use brand new features before browsers support them.