I don't think I understand the issue. AFAICT, all the system implemented iterators don't need to clean up anything that's not already cleaned up by GC, so they wouldn't need a .return method anyway. Is there a counter-example?
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 3:48 AM, Andreas Rossberg <[email protected]>wrote: > On 29 April 2014 20:35, David Herman <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Apr 29, 2014, at 12:40 AM, Andy Wingo <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Indeed I expect that in > >> practice most iterators in an ES6 program will be map, set, and array > >> iterators, which in practice will not be implemented with generators. > > > > I strongly disagree with this. Generators will by far be the most > convenient and common way to implement iterators, regardless of their data > source. > > Yes, but Andy was talking about VM-provided iterators, where > convenience of implementation does not matter. It is safe to assume > that for all VMs a generator-based implementation will be > substantially more expensive than a hand-written one (and will remain > so in the foreseeable future, I'm pretty sure of that -- e.g. inlining > is tricky for generators). So VM implementers won't use generators > internally. > > /Andreas > -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
