stage 2.7 tracking

[michaelficarra]

• [X] Complete spec text: all semantics, syntax, and APIs are completely described
• [ ] Assigned reviewers have signed off on the current spec text
  • [x] @nicolo-ribaudo
  • [x] @jessealama
  • [ ] @gibson042
• [x] Relevant editor group has signed off on the current spec text
  • [X] @michaelficarra
  • [x] @syg
  • [x] @bakkot
• [x] presentation to committee
  • [x] slides prepared
  • [x] materials linked from the agenda
  • [x] presented to committee
  • [x] approved for advancement
  • [x] updated proposals list
  • [x] updated README

[nicolo-ribaudo]

Do you need the review by the upcoming plenary?

[michaelficarra]

@nicolo-ribaudo Yes, please. I should have an updated README and the 2.7 presentation ready tomorrow in case you want to wait for those. Also, note #9 was just opened.

[jessealama]

Nic and I noticed a couple of things:

• In step 1.a.v.3.b.ii.iii.iii.ii.i (!) it appears that record is defined but not used. I guess it was intended to be used in the next step.
• Also, editorial: shouldn't it be *true* rather than true?

[jessealama]

(I was unable to tick the box next to my name.)

[michaelficarra]

@jessealama @nicolo-ribaudo #11 has been merged. Can you take another look before I mark off your approval?

[nicolo-ribaudo]

✅

[jessealama]

✅

[syg]

editorially lgtm

[ljharb]

Implemented in https://github.com/es-shims/iterator-helpers as well, as a form of spec review.

[michaelficarra]

@ljharb A great way to test your polyfill would be to write some test262 tests 😉