I'm not sure where the "don't break the web" threshold is set at (or how that gets evaluated), but I do see a lot of matches for "Array.prototype.remove" on GitHub, at least:
https://github.com/search?l=JavaScript&q=%22Array.prototype.remove%22&type=Code&utf8=%E2%9C%93 There's also an old blog post by John Resig with an example implementation ( https://johnresig.com/blog/javascript-array-remove), so I'm not sure if that gave rise to any significant adoption or not. I like the proposal in general, though - just throwing this out there in case other names should be considered (maybe `discard`?). On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Alexander Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > Small Sets could maybe be represented without the tree? > > And everything you say about SIMD could be done too when the set has a > viable homogeneous type. > > > > On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 at 14:26, T.J. Crowder <tj.crowder@farsightsoftware. > com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Isiah Meadows >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Inline. (Hindsight, should've included this in the previous email) >> >> Good deal, that's the kind of thing I was thinking would strengthen the >> argument. >> >> I think you may have meant to have more after *"In nearly every virtual >> DOM library, in >> most , the core involves..."* ? (Ignore this if the rest of that sentence >> wasn't important.) >> >> -- T.J. Crowder >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -- Jeremy Martin 661.312.3853 @jmar777 <https://twitter.com/jmar777> / @j <https://stream.live/j>
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
