On Dec 28, 2011, at 10:14 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: "Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]>
> > I take it you are simply reiterating the desire for a standard system
> > provided high entropy object-identity hash that is guaranteed to correspond
> > to === and is. I agree (though it didn't make it into ES6), but that's the
> > dual of the question Axel is asking.
>
> If we really need it, I believe that we can still choose to add a standard
> Object.hash to go along with Object.is, and not break the complexity budget
> or aspirational schedule. Just my two cents. We had some consensus in 2010 on
> how such a hash would avoid leaking addresses or partial address order:
>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2010-July/011489.html
>
>
> I'd be happy to see it accepted into ES-next. Part of negotiating the
> complexity budget is to also beware of precedent setting, i.e., accepting new
> small items may invite the advancing of other new small items, each of which
> is well below the complexity budget. But even then, I think I still agree on
> this one.
>
> A shame no one thought to advance it at the historic May meeting.
If there is no controversy about it, then I would like to see it added.
However, it isn't sometime I wanted to use committee Karma on if there were any
objections.
Allen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
