I think a combination of Object.entries, .flatMap and Object.fromEntries could do the job
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 1:12 PM Andrea Giammarchi < [email protected]> wrote: > both CircularJSON (deprecated) and flatted (the successor) easily deal > with circular references while serializing / unserializing objects, yet you > need to keep stored data simple. > > This is usually a common case for postMessage / workers though, so it > shouldn't be a big deal. > > stringifiers and revivers can give you extra power to serialize / > unserialize RegExps, Date, as well as BigInt too, storing values via > `{new:'RegExp',args:['value', 'gi']}` simplifying the case for > `{new:'Array', args:[...the-actual-array]}` and `{new: 'Object', args: > [..the-actual-object...]}` > > Well, I'm sure you got there are many ways to deep copy and also with > circular references. > > Regards > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 5:23 PM Naveen Chawla <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Is there any real problem with circular reference cloning? I don't see >> any, Please let me know in the simplest case e.g. { a: a } (obviously >> contrived syntax here) >> >> Otherwise, I agree completely about the 4 dots being the wrong syntax for >> this, precisely for the reason you gave >> >> On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 18:18 Henrique Barcelos < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> IMO, this would be very problematic. >>> >>> 1. 4 dots are visually almost identical to 3 dots. This could introduce >>> severe bugs because of a simple hard to spot typo. >>> >>> 2. Deep traversing will always have performance problems in some cases. >>> Dealing with circular references can take this issue even further. >>> >>> I believe such functionality should be used in very specific situations, >>> where object shape is well-known, not very deep and definitely not >>> circular. So, supporting this at the core of the language will probably be >>> frowned upon by the community. >>> >>> Em ter, 23 de out de 2018 08:57, Ahad Cove <[email protected]> >>> escreveu: >>> >>>> Hello Scripters, >>>> >>>> I really appreciate everything you all have done for the language and >>>> have no complaints over here. >>>> I do have a suggestion though :) >>>> >>>> At work we’ve almost got rid of lodash, except we still need it for >>>> DeepCopy vs rolling our own. >>>> It’s the same with my side projects. I don’t use lodash because the >>>> main times that I need deep copy is when I’m either digging into the Redux >>>> store using React, or copying an observable in the Angular world. >>>> >>>> I believe ES Script users would appreciate having a deep copy spread >>>> operator tremendously. >>>> >>>> My proposal is to go off of the current spread operator we currently >>>> have in ES and make it 4 dots for a deep spread. This can be used on >>>> Objects or Arrays. >>>> >>>> ‘’’js >>>> const oldDeepObj = { >>>> InnerObj: { >>>> func: () => return ‘wow’ >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> const obj = {....oldDeepObj} >>>> obj.innerObj.func = () => return ‘nice’ >>>> >>>> oldDeepObj.innerObj.func() >>>> > wow >>>> ‘’’ >>>> >>>> Thank you! >>>> Looking forward to hearing back from you all. >>>> If there’s any other questions let me know >>>> >>>> - Bilal Abdullah >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> es-discuss mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> Henrique >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
