just try it and see https://repl.it/@caub/obj-vs-map-perf
2018-04-24 20:29 GMT+02:00 somonek <[email protected]>: > Thanks, hat's probably what I'll do. > > I was also thinking looking at @Augusto's approach that if you replace the > object with a Map you can iterate as Augusto mentioned > const [firstProp, secondProp, ...othersKeys] = myMap; > and the order of items should not be a worry. > > Any comments on Map's performance in such a case? > > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:22 PM, T.J. Crowder < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 7:07 PM, Jordan Harband <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Regardless of what's in the spec, relying on objects having an order >> among >> > their properties violates the conceptual mental model of objects: a bag >> of >> > unordered key/value pairs. >> > >> > If you want to convert an array - the best way to preserve order - into >> an >> > object for "performance" reasons, then you may also want to preserve an >> > array of IDs so that ordering can be relied upon. >> >> Absolutely agree. As I said originally, relying on the order of the >> properties in the object is almost always a bad idea. >> >> @somonek, an object with an array of keys is probably your best >> solution. Wrap it up in an object with an API that all of the code >> updating it can use, so you don't have consistency issues. You could >> even give it an iterator. :-) >> >> -- 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
