Mark S. Miller wrote:
WeakMap.has is fine (and already speced) because the presence of the association depends on the key. However, if the key is garbage, a strong ref to the value does not preserve the association in the map.
Right! Thanks. /be
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:Is this true? I can see how enumeration and size would leak the GC schedule, but to test has or contains, you need a strong ref, which means the key or value cannot yet be garbage. If you have the capability, there's no non-determinism. What am I missing? /be Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: On Nov 3, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote: On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: Also any reason contains should be provided for WeakMap? I not seeing why it shouldn't be there too. Yes! The set of values actually contained by the WeakMap at any moment is non-deterministic, depending on the scheduling of gc. But this non-determinism is non-observable. WeakMap.contains would make it observable. yup-- Cheers,--MarkM _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss -- Cheers, --MarkM _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
