1. The users of this style guide will probably expect that all of the rules that it prescribes will be enforced by eslint. However, this is not the case - there is a secret, non-documented segmentation where some rules are enforced and others are not, because they would be "too noisy on a legacy codebase". An example of a problematic rule like this is covered in issue #2020. I propose that all of

There doesn't seem to be coverage for redeclaring "arguments" in direct eval in function parameter expressions. For example:

function f(p = eval("var arguments")) {}
f();

should throw a SyntaxError when evaluating EvalDeclarationInstantiation in step 5.d.ii.2.a.i.

I've written some basic tests at <https://phabricator.

• My issue is not bikeshedding. (we can bikeshed at
  a later proposal stage)
• My issue is not a request to add lots of stuff to
  the semantics. (we can add things in follow-on proposals)
• My issue is appropriate for a stage 0 proposal

Champions: Sam Goto (@samuelgoto), Rick Waldron (@rwaldron)
Spec Repo: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-numeric-separator
Moved to Stage 1 at the May 2017 meeting: https://github.com/tc39/agendas/blob/master/2017/05.md
Moved from Stage 1 to Stage 2 at the July 2017 meeting: https://github.com/tc39/agendas/blob/master/2017/07.md
Moved to Stage 3 at the Nov 2017 meeting: https://github.com/tc39/

If N-api bindings are used, this implies Node 9 or 10. Node 8.x would not be supported unless N-api gets back ported, right?