I understand. I hope to find a good form of literals. Is there a fact that literals are easier to optimize in the following cases?
``` for (let i of [1 to 5]) { ...... } vs for (let i of Array.range(1, 5)) { ...... } ``` If so, it seems that we can attract vendors' interests. 2016-12-14 17:29 GMT+09:00 Andy Earnshaw <andyearns...@gmail.com>: > I think you'd be lucky to even get to that stage. Vendors aren't keen on > any kind of backwards incompatibility in new specs and trying to get this > to stage 4 with such a glaring one would be practically impossible. > > It's not just the incompatibility either. You also introduce an > inconsistencies where things like `[1..toFixed(2)]` doesn't mean the same > as `[ 1..toFixed(2) ]`. That kind of thing is just confusing to developers. > > When you consider these things, it becomes clear that it's not practical > to change the language this way for such a small benefit. > > On Wed, 14 Dec 2016, 03:00 Hikaru Nakashima, <oao.hikaru....@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Oh, I understood it. >> It looks like serious problem, but it is may not actually. >> If this spec change doesn't break web, we can introduce this idea? >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> es-discuss@mozilla.org >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss