On May 15, 2009, at 11:15 AM, Jason Orendorff wrote:
I like the idea of going after the concurrency problem now. I like the idea of doing one language feature instead of two (concurrency and generators). Do you have a solution in mind for this kind of problem?
Not to rain on anyone's parade here, but Ecma TC39 is not the right group to do research and then standardize it.
We can spend unlimited es-discuss messages on this, of couse, but (a) at a cost to other discussions; (b) not if the undelivered, always- over-the-next-hill promise of a unified solution is used to stop progress of extensions toward standardization in TC39. One can easily wait forever for the best -- Voltaire had something to say about that.
Implementors should experiment and take risks in the market. TC39 should standardize after that all shakes out. If we can have agreements in committee on direction and even details, great. But the committee does not have the breadth or competence to invent much that's new while standardizing.
Meanwhile, until some two-birds-one-stone solution emerges (which could happen, I'm skeptical about it happening soon), we have generators shipping in SpiderMonkey and Rhino, and they help programmers avoid having to hand-code tedious and error-prone state management (control blocks for callbacks) when solving common iteration and pseudo-threading problems.
But perhaps generators could be informative for a while. The reason they came up was, as Mark said, because they were an extension already considered Harmonious in TC39.
/be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
