On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Erik Arvidsson <[email protected]>wrote:
> I'm opposed to anything that contains ephemer* in the name. Most JS > developers do not know what this means. > > Both WeakMap and CacheMap seems acceptable with a slight favor for WeakMap. > Cool. I'm warming to WeakMap as well. Do we have any objections to WeakMap? > > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 16:40, Maciej Stachowiak <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm not sure if there is currently a plan to add a vanilla Map. Some have >> suggested that Object.hash is enough, and JS libraries could build on top of >> the primitive. I think it would seem strange to add ephemeron tables without >> a regular map data structure too, even if in theory you could build your >> own. It seems to me that the standard library of a modern language should >> include a reasonable group of fundamental data structures. I would also >> argue for adding a hashtable-based Set, but I will concede that is less >> essential. >> > > Yes, I don't think adding Ephemer{on,al}Map without a standard Map is > acceptable. I'm also in favor of Set. > > I also don't think we should skip Map and Set in favor of Object.hash since > it would mean all libraries would have to ship down code to do maps and sets > and it would also mean that different libraries would have a harder time to > work together due to different Map and Set APIs. > > -- > erik > -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
