I used the term 'language contributors' rather than TC39 as an
intentionally vague way of describing people like us.
The ISO C++ Committee also lacks a consensus on everything, but that
doesn't mean those people and the people around them can't debate and
establish a consensus on *something*. Henc
Though, PEP-8 was created in 2001 and in significant part codified already
used conventions. And JavaScript does not have such widely followed
conventions - except camelCase for functions and PascalCase for classes.
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Jones wrote:
> I used the term 'lang
Hi.
Is there any comprehensive answer about why ability to observe garbage
collection is considered undesirable in JavaScript?
Michał Wadas
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
IIRC, Most sources of non-determinism are obvious:
* Builtins like Date and Random
* Host environment artifacts like network message receipt order
and a piece of code that doesn't rely on one of those is deterministic.
There are a few sources of non-determinism that are hard to statically rule
https://w3ctag.github.io/design-principles/#js-gc
From: es-discuss [mailto:es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Michal
Wadas
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 08:07
To: es-discuss@mozilla.org
Subject: Observable GC
Hi.
Is there any comprehensive answer about why ability to observe garbage
For what it’s worth, I have never agreed with this policy. This policy seems to
be based on feelings not facts.
I remember implementing real time GCs for Java, which changed GC timing and
behavior a lot, and having zero problem getting that aspect of the GC to work
well with existing code. It
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Filip Pizlo wrote:
> For what it’s worth, I have never agreed with this policy. This policy seems
> to be based on feelings not facts.
>
> I remember implementing real time GCs for Java, which changed GC timing and
> behavior a lot, and having zero problem getting
> On Oct 20, 2017, at 7:45 AM, Mike Samuel wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Filip Pizlo wrote:
>> For what it’s worth, I have never agreed with this policy. This policy seems
>> to be based on feelings not facts.
>>
>> I remember implementing real time GCs for Java, which changed
I do think that we need weak references for all the reasons given in the
proposal. But indeed non-determinism is a concern. The reference Dominic
pointed at is one of two primary (areas of) considerations. The other is
just how many amazing things you can do if turns are deterministic (more
reliabl
There is a glaring inconsistency in the criteria we use to evaluate these
issues. While we are understandably reluctant to admit more non-determinism
into the platform via weakrefs, we have admitted an astonishingly greater
degree of non-determinism into the platform via "Shared Array Buffers"
(SAB
> On Oct 20, 2017, at 10:29 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
>
> There is a glaring inconsistency in the criteria we use to evaluate these
> issues. While we are understandably reluctant to admit more non-determinism
> into the platform via weakrefs, we have admitted an astonishingly greater
> degree
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Filip Pizlo wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2017, at 10:29 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
>
> There is a glaring inconsistency in the criteria we use to evaluate these
> issues. While we are understandably reluctant to admit more non-determinism
> into the platform via weakrefs
12 matches
Mail list logo
