in line
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 2:54 PM, David Bruant <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 02/10/2013 19:45, Andrea Giammarchi a écrit : > > > Yes, only for these particular examples. > Tab mentioned Array extras, that's the reason I've put them in the plate. Promises ... never used them so far. I'll try to see how convenient is => there the day I'll need/use them. > Optimization is possible to avoid creating n function objects. > Actually, I've discussed that with Jim Blandy (who works on SpiderMonkey) > some time ago and he told me that if given some heuristics on function > length and number of repetition, it's completely inlined and the function > is only actually allocated in the slow path (so asymptotically never). It > also works with nested .forEach! > Still that does not promote reusable code but inline ad-hoc operation usually abused in for loops too as it is the classic `$('CSS')` anti pattern repeated all over in jQuery world. It took a while to tell developers that maybe they simply need to address that once per closure/logic ^_^ You know what I mean ... glad to know SpiderMonkey can optimize that. I hope V8, JSC, and Chakra can do the same as transparent win for laziest devs. > Why would they have even tried interoperability with DOM events? > you know the myth "write once, deploy everywhere" right ? They decided to avoid the single Event object as arguments with its types. There's no way in common Emitters to have an event object and an event type ... only a hopefully null error and some result after or forced different behavior through manual `emit` when you end up passing by default `null` as first emitted argument due common handler pattern. Also node didn't know about handleEvent ... so yes, it would have been a better world if node.js chaps had a better look in what DOM Events were offering when they started the implementation, **IMO** > All in all, I think that what you're trying to demonstrate > I am not trying to demonstrate anything ... I am showing solution to common problems trying to understand where this => would be better than what we have now. I haven't said fat arrow is bad, I am trying to understand why is better ... I don't have to use it and I won't for a while since I am still a old-school hand written optimized JS donkey-idiotic developer but since it has been discussed and applauded for long time now I am curious why is that and discovered a lot in this thread. Thanks
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
