Brendan Eich wrote:
Herby Vojčík wrote:
I feel there is objection to introduce magical [[NullPatternObject]]
into language, but all of CS-style soft-accesses could be solved very
cleanly and consistently.
No, because (a) the overhead of a new object is too high; (b) with any
Spec / impl overhead or memory / perf overhead? Because the latter is of
little worries, common uses of foo.? like foo.?.bar can be of course
shortcut without using [[NullPatternObject]] at all.
Herby
kind of suffix-? or suffix-.? as you proposed it would be observable
that you get a new object instead of short-circuiting to undefined --
the new object is exposed in the language.
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
