On Oct 3, 2012, at 7:47 AM, Erik Arvidsson wrote: > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 3:24 AM, Andreas Rossberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 3 October 2012 05:38, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Which is more important, iterating over holes (preserved if possible), or >>> skipping them and therefore spreading array-likes but not iterables? >> >> I, for one, couldn't care less about holes. We shouldn't compromise >> any useful feature just for the sake of preserving some array hole >> craziness. > > Filling in holes with undefined seems like the right thing to do. > People do not depend on holes. > > Having Array.prototype.@iterator skip holes is bad because we don't > have the index so we don't know that anything was skipped. > > To repeat myself; holes are not common and we should keep things > simple and having Array.prototype.@iterator iterate over array[0] to > array[length - 1] is the most expected result. >
However, that would mean that Array.prototype.forEach and for-of over the same array are not always interchangeable. _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
