https://twitter.com/slightlylate/status/475089406957604864
Take care On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Alex Russell <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Andrea Giammarchi < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> FWIW I think this is a non issue and "how many" should not be relevant. >> >> If developers understand the issue, the fix is straight forward. >> > > I wish to live in your world of unicorns and magic for in that world I AM > A WIZARD. > > >> instead of doing this >> >> ```javascript >> if (obj.entries) { >> // do stuff with entries >> } else if(Array.isArray(obj)) { >> // do stuff with obj >> } >> ``` >> >> or this >> >> `var entries = obj.entries || obj;` >> >> we should just advocate this: >> >> ```javascript >> if (Array.isArray(obj)) { >> // do stuff with obj >> } else if(obj.entries) { >> // do stuff with entry property >> } >> ``` >> >> or using `instanceof` when the realm is not a problem (if performance is >> a concern and Array.isArray is the bottleneck which is rarely the case) >> >> This also seems to be an API only related problem where both `Array` and >> `Object` could be passed as parameter but yeah, objects with properties >> named as `list`, `items`, or `entries` are quite common but I personally >> prefer a future proof approach/small refactoring than a stopper for new >> specs. >> >> my 2 cents >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Alex Russell <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Right. Would love to know the size/traffic of the "number of sites" >>> affected. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:11 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Would .items fare better, I wonder. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Or outreach to sites the break? >>>> >>>> Rick >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> /be >>>>> >>>>> Oliver Hunt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> It turns out there are a number of sites (such as mobile.twitter.com >>>>>> <http://mobile.twitter.com>) that are property detecting .entries on >>>>>> objects, and that means that they're breaking when >>>>>> Array.prototype.entries >>>>>> is provided. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> We're removing it from JSC now, until we can find a way to expose it >>>>>> without causing site breakage, although this does seem like fixing it >>>>>> would >>>>>> require bringing back the awful "pretend that you're undefined" horror. >>>>>> >>>>>> --Oliver >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
