On 3/26/15 at 8:51 AM, [email protected] (Kyle Simpson) wrote:
As I mentioned near the beginning of this thread,
`Reflect.parse(..)` would generally suit the proposed use-case,
except it does a lot of extra work (creating and returning a
tree -- a value that then I'd be throwing away creating
unnecessary GC) that feature testing itself doesn't need. It's
unclear that `Reflect.parse(..)` would provide any additional
performance gains over the current `eval` / `Function`
approach, and could even be potentially worse.
I don't see a real need for high performance in these tests.
AFAICS, they occur once, probably at load time. A smart JS
implementation might even parse the Reflect.parse() string at
the same time it is parsing the main set of JS code. As such,
the extra overhead for CPU and GC will probably be swamped by
the communication CPU and transmission times.
Not using eval makes it more likely that you will be able to
perform the tests in "safe" subsets of JS.
Cheers - Bill
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz | Privacy is dead, get over | Periwinkle
(408)356-8506 | it. | 16345
Englewood Ave
www.pwpconsult.com | - Scott McNealy | Los Gatos,
CA 95032
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
