We should nail down the meaning of /\s/. Should it be the minimum (IE) or the maximum (Opera)?
Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK) wrote: > I have uploaded to the wiki a draft proposal > <http://wiki.ecmascript.org/lib/exe/fetch.php?id=es3.1%3Atargeted_additions_to_array_string_object_date&cache=cache&media=es3.1:es31_stringobject.pdf> > > to add a couple of generics to the String object. In order to retain the > subset relationship with proposed ES4, these should be considered for > addition to ES4 too. > > > > I have extracted the String portion of the ES3 spec, added a rationale > (with hyperlinks) at the beginning, and made relevant changes to the > included section 15.5 text, with some comments added. I have tried to be > mindful of compat. > > > > pratap > > > > > > *From:* Brendan Eich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 01, 2008 5:21 AM > *To:* Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK) > *Cc:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Subject:* Re: Static generics on String > > > > On Apr 30, 2008, at 8:58 AM, Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK) wrote: > > Yes, I did notice that these are already on String.prototype, and > that they are generic. Is proposed-ES4 going to add a static method > of the same name for each such prototype generic method?! > > > > Yes. > > > > The ES3 String.prototype methods generally specify that ToString is > applied to "this" and to string arguments. Is it also the case for the > String generics? If so, it would seen to limit their utility for string > like wrappers or alternative string representations? > > > > The ToString is ok if you are willing to tolerate the overhead of a > copy. Alternative is to do length and indexed accesses to the wrapper, > which forwards to the java.lang.String or similar. But that changes how > ES1-3 are spec'ed and it's work -- and premature optimization is the > root of all evil. > > > > Is your experience that the static generic string methods have “carried > their weight” in your implementations. In other words, based upon your > experience would you recommend their inclusion in ES3.1? > > > > Not for 3.1. They are cheap to implement but 3.1 has enough to do, and > the String static generics are not big-bang-for-the-buck. > > > > Is there a general rule for where we (proposed-ES4 & ES3.1) should add > any new generic methods? In ES3.1 we are considering adding a "trim" and > a "quote" method for Strings, and I was thinking of adding these on > String.prototype (just like the other generic methods). However, the > static generics proposal page suggests that they should then also be > added as statics on String. > > > > If you skip adding any static generics for 3.1, no worries. > > > > Can you say more about quote? We've implemented it for years. Need to > get it into both 3.1 and 4 to keep the subset relation. > > > > To conform to the rest of the ES3, I shall propose adding these methods > (trim and quote) to String.prototype only, and not create a parallel set > of statics. > > Do you see any issues with this proposal? > > No, that sounds good. Let's just get quote on the ES4 radar. Is there a > spec for it? > > > > /be > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Es3.x-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es3.x-discuss _______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
