On Mar 13, 2011, at 3:58 PM, Charles Kendrick wrote:
> Brendan, Bradley and others - there's no need to search for a relatively
> uncommon use case for ordered maps indexed by keys - a far more common use
> case is enumerated data stored numerically, eg, marital status:
>
> {
> 2: "Married",
> 1: "Single",
> 5: "Divorced"
> }
It's still a synthetic example, and real web sites/apps would be more
compelling and helpful for forge consensus.
> Likewise maps from numeric primary key values to display values for the
> records.
>
> So this use case comes up just about every time JavaScript is manipulating
> data coming from a SQL database - extremely common.
Too assert-y, sorry. I'm on your side at this point (see my reply to Claus,
just sent). But evidence trumps assertions or suppositions, however plausible.
> Argument from Java??? You wound me, sir! I would never argue from the
> viewpoint of such a verbose language and far prefer your JavaScript.
No offense. In my reply to Claus I said developers' eyes glaze over at
LinkedHashMap. I'm not putting anyone down, on any side of this. JS's objects
often "DWIM" and this is a strength as well as a weakness. It's hard to say it
is purely a bug, IM(truly Humble, I hope, due to feeling developer pain these
almost-16 years)O.
> So we're looking at standardizing a behavior for Object that no one has ever
> felt the need to implement as a reusable component.
>
> I would argue this means we're standardizing a very rare use case.
It may be rare; it's hard to measure frequency of use (static or more imp.
dynamic use). This indexed-first-in-indexed-order idea has come from
implementations, I think. The implementors may be reacting to user demands too,
but the optimization wins carry weight and may be dominant.
This could indeed be the wrong way to evolve the spec.
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
