n is going to be
localization which I find obnoxious to include in an often shipped
defacto lib.
- Matthew Robb
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 3:17 AM, Michael Kriegel
<michael.krie...@actifsource.com
<mailto:michael.krie...@actifsource.com>> wrote:
Quoting my initial
ies which are so widely-used as to be
defacto standards.
Bob
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Michael Kriegel
<michael.krie...@actifsource.com
<mailto:michael.krie...@actifsource.com>> wrote:
I would like to suggest to take up date formatting into the
standard. Either as
a library.
On 21.09.2017 08:56, kdex wrote:
You can build custom formats with
`Intl.DateTimeFormat.prototype.formatToParts`.
Combine these results with template literals; isn't that enough?
On Thursday, September 21, 2017 8:52:10 AM CEST Michael Kriegel wrote:
You cannot set an arbitrary format. From
at strings.
On 21.09.2017 08:45, kdex wrote:
So what's wrong with Intl.DateTimeFormat?
On Thursday, September 21, 2017 8:41:33 AM CEST Michael Kriegel wrote:
I would like to suggest to take up date formatting into the standard.
Either as optional format parameter on Date.prototype.toDateString() or
as
/#sec-date-time-string-format
I know there are libraries for that, but I think it is fundamental
enough to put it into the standard instead.
I hope this was not already discussed before and I just did not find the
thread.
--
Michael Kriegel • Head of R • Actifsource AG • Haldenstrasse 1 • CH
ing-a-javascript-interpreter-back-to-the-top-of-your-code>.
--
בשאיפה לעולם שמח יותר לבני אדם וחיות כאחד,
Aspiring for a happier world for humans and animals alike,
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/list
don't mind
>>>> > being wrong. As long as you can back those claims up when
introducing
>>>> > something like this.
>>>> >
>>>> > - peter___
>>>> es-discuss mailing list
>&
__
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss@mozilla.org>
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
<https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
___________
es-discu
ke having to support features deprecated for over a decade.
My only question at this point is: would it be possible to emit
deprecation warnings for some features, so it would be easier to
remove some of the legacy bloat? (example: `RegExp.$1`)
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017, 01:21 Michael Kr
d it, rather than futilely fight it.
~TJ
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Michael Kriegel • Head of R • Actifsource AG • Haldenstrasse 1 • CH-6340 Baar
• www.actifsource.com • +41 56 25
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Michael Kriegel • Head of R • Actifsource AG • Haldenstrasse 1 • CH-6340 Baar
• www.actifsource.com • +41 56 250 40 02
___
es-discuss mailing list
e
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Michael Kriegel • Head of R • Actifsource AG • Haldenstrasse 1 • CH-6340 Baar
• www.actifsource.com • +41 56 250 40 02
__
mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
<https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Michael Kriegel • Head of R • Actifsource AG • Haldenstrasse 1 •
on it?
On 30.03.2017 11:09, Michael Kriegel wrote:
Totally agree. WeakRef is what we want and WeakValueMap is what I want
to build with it. Sugar would be if the standard provides "an
out-of-the-box WeakValueMap *as well*".
Automatic removal of entries after they became obso
've needed
them, they were pretty much the only option... I don't mind an
out-of-the-box WeakValueMap *as well*, I just don't want it *instead*.
-- T.J. Crowder
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Michael Kriegel
<michael.krie...@actifsource.com
<mailto:michael.krie...@actifsource.com>
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
<https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Michael Kriegel • Head of R • Actifsource AG • Haldenstr
Wouldn't it be preferable to discuss, whether the requested feature
makes sense or not, before looking at whether it is possible to easily
implement it in the current garbage collectors on the market?
On 13.07.2016 18:11, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Jul 13, 2016, at 7:18 AM, Michael Kriegel
On 13.07.2016 16:27, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 7/13/16 10:18 AM, Michael Kriegel wrote:
But shouldn't it be predictable, whether there
are still "non-weak" references to an object?
Maybe. The GC may include a machine stack scanner to root things
referenced on the stack, which can
implementation
often didn't even require iteration, but just changing the data
layout altogether.
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016, 08:13 Michael Kriegel
<michael.krie...@actifsource.com
<mailto:michael.krie...@actifsource.com>> wrote:
Hi everyone,
not sure,
te:
Could you explain a real world use case for this? I recall some that
it would've simplified some, but the best implementation often didn't
even require iteration, but just changing the data layout altogether.
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016, 08:13 Michael Kriegel
<michael.krie...@acti
Hi everyone,
not sure, whether this is the right place for discussing a feature
request - and how to find out, whether this was already
proposed/discussed before and with which result... My google search did
not bring up anything about it.
On my opinion it should be made possible to iterate
21 matches
Mail list logo
