On Feb 23, 2015 6:06 AM, "Andrea Giammarchi" <[email protected]> wrote: > > quick one to whoever will write the proposal: please bear in mind the empty function **must** have a frozen prototype too > > Regards
Andrea, good catch. > > On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Jordan Harband <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I'd love to bring a proposal to the committee for this since it seems like there's interest. >> >> I suspect that even though some of the "empties" seem useless to some, somebody somewhere will find a use case, and consistency is useful (that everything that could have a concept of "empty" would have a .empty) >> >> Errata: >> - I don't believe `GeneratorFunction` is a global, so we wouldn't need to specify one of those I actually forgot about that... Makes no sense to me why there isn't one in the first place. Maybe an oversight in ES6? (could probably be put on track for ES7 easily, simply requiring that the string argument represents the source code for a GeneratorBody). Probably better suited to a separate proposal, though. I can write a more accurate prollyfill later today. >> - I wonder if `Promise.empty` as `new Promise()`, ie, a forever pending promise, would make sense? Maybe a forever-fulfilled one? Although there are probably use cases for all three kinds, pending, fulfilled, and rejected. Maybe all three would be better than a simple 'empty' one. >> - or `Date.empty` as `new Date(0)`? That could work. >> - We'd definitely want `Map.empty` and `Set.empty` assuming `Object.freeze` actually froze them Object.freeze does not freeze them, as far as I know. It might require method overrides. >> - We'd probably want `Object.freeze(Object.seal(Object.preventExtensions(empty)))`, to be extra restrictive. Doesn't Object.freeze imply the other two? I thought it did. >> >> Does anyone see any problems or have any objections, beyond "I don't think there's a use case"? >> >> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Isiah Meadows <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I really liked Jordan Harband's suggestion of adding Array.empty, Function.empty, etc. to ES7. It is relatively easy to polyfill as well. >>> >>> ```js >>> [Array, >>> ArrayBuffer, >>> Int8Array, >>> Int16Array, >>> Int32Array, >>> Uint8Array, >>> Uint8ClampedArray, >>> Uint16Array, >>> Uint32Array, >>> Float32Array, >>> Float64Array] >>> .map(T => [T, new T(0)]) >>> .concat([ >>> [Object, {}], >>> [String, ''], >>> [RegExp, /(?:)/], >>> [Function, function () {}], >>> [GeneratorFunction, function* () {}] >>> ]) >>> .forEach(([root, empty]) => >>> Object.defineProperty(root, 'empty', { >>> value: Object.freeze(empty), >>> configurable: true, >>> enumerable: false, >>> writable: false >>> })); >>> ``` >>> >>> The code effectively explains what I think would make suitable replacements for each. I don't see the use cases for some of these, though, such as `String.empty` or `RegExp.empty`. >>> >>> -- >>> Isiah Meadows >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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
