yes, I should have checked the specs but that page should be either updated or removed.
Anyway you still didn't convince me generators were needed at all there, neither that I can "simply shim iterators" 'cause this makes generators pointless in first place if it was so easy to polyfill ... which is not. The polyfill gonna grow in size for no concrete reason now, can I at least ask if current specs about Maps, Sets, and WeakMaps are final? Thanks On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <[email protected]>wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Andrea Giammarchi > <[email protected]> wrote: > > wait ... so it's just the Harmony page that is outdated ? 'cause I've > > reached that through MDN ... so no, gonna dig more into specs. > > > > Tab Atkins .. you cannot shim generators since it's not just about > returning > > a bounce of objects, it's the ability to "hold" that is missing ... if > you > > don't need to hold why on earth that page shows *values() *keys() and > > *items() ? iterable is the only one that **might** make sense, imho > > The fact that the suggested implementation is with a generator is > completely irrelevant. From the outside, you can't tell the > difference between a generator function and an ordinary function that > returns a manually-constructed iterator. The latter is easy to > polyfill. > > Further, you should actually read the spec, not an outdated harmony > proposal wiki page. > > ~TJ >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
