Le 15/03/2014 01:32, Brandon Benvie a écrit :
On 3/14/2014 5:16 PM, Mark Volkmann wrote:
Does ES6 add any new ways to iterate over the values in an object?
I've done a lot of searching, but haven't seen anything.
I'm wondering if there is something more elegant than this:
If we can get uglify and closure compiler to reject it it will go a long
way toward making sure it doesn't crop up in the wild.
On Mar 14, 2014 10:20 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote:
Peter van der Zee wrote:
Which browsers currently don't accept this construct? I wasn't even aware
Le 15/03/2014 22:51, C. Scott Ananian a écrit :
It would be nicer to add an Object.entries() method that would return
that iterator.
Object.prototype.entries or Object.entries(obj)?
That would be less error prone than adding a default iterator to every
object.
The world has survived
I’ve landed the change to JSC to silently ignore the assignment in the
non-strict “var ident =“ case, everything else is still an error so
deconstruction and |of| enumeration will trigger a syntax error.
—Oliver
On Mar 15, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com wrote:
Brendan
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 5:19 PM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Even if error prone, I'd be interested to hear about arguments in the sense
that the risk outweighs the benefits. Iterable-by-default objects is a nice
battery included feature.
I'm pretty sure es-discuss has been over
This thread's original question is answered by the Dict API (
https://github.com/rwaldron/tc39-notes/blob/master/es6/2012-11/nov-29.md#conclusionresolution-5
).
(more inline below)
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 6:19 PM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 15/03/2014 22:51, C. Scott Ananian a
Jason Orendorff wrote:
I'd like to see an Object.entries method, and Object.values for
completeness. Same visibility rules as Object.keys.
for (let [k, v] of Object.entries(myObj)) {
// do something with k and v
}
+1, or +2 counting static methods :-).
/be
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Jason Orendorff
jason.orendo...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 5:19 PM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Even if error prone, I'd be interested to hear about arguments in the
sense
that the risk outweighs the benefits. Iterable-by-default
Kevin Smith wrote:
async function af() {}
{ async af() { } }
This lines up with what Luke Hoban presented at the last TC39 meeting.
So far, so good (but not a done deal by any means, of course). The main
bone of contention is the use of ! in promises future-proposed syntax.
The
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 6:19 PM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 15/03/2014 22:51, C. Scott Ananian a écrit :
It would be nicer to add an Object.entries() method that would return that
iterator.
Object.prototype.entries or Object.entries(obj)?
`Object.entries(obj)` and
10 matches
Mail list logo
