On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Mark S. Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> On Mar 7, 2013, at 11:05 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote: >> >> On 7 March 2013 18:30, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mar 7, 2013, at 7:37 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote: >> >> >> 1) Are the methods of a generator object installed as frozen >> >> properties? (I hope so, otherwise it would be more difficult to >> >> aggressively optimise generators.) >> >> >> We discussed the factoring of the generator objects at the Nov 27 meeting. >> >> https://github.com/rwldrn/tc39-notes/tree/master/es6/2012-11 there is a >> >> sketch of the hierarchy we agreed to in in the notes >> >> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/3531958/tc39/generator-diagram-1.jpg >> >> >> TThe design I presented at the meeting is very close to that final one, >> >> answers this question, and is easier to read: >> >> >> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=meetings:proposed_generator_class_hierarcy_nov_2013.png >> >> >> Ah, thanks. It seems that I missed that part of the meeting. I'll have a >> look. >> >> >> I created a more readable class hierarchy diagram based on the above >> photo from the Nov. meeting. This is what I'm using as my guide for >> putting generators into the spec. draft. >> The diagram is at >> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/lib/exe/fetch.php?cache=cache&media=harmony:es6_generator_object_model_3-29-13.png >> >> >> The most significant change from the meeting (and it really wasn't >> explicit on the whiteboard) is that generator prototypes don't have a >> "constructor" property that links back to its generator function instance. >> In other words, you can't say: >> >> function * ofCollection() {for (i of collection) yield i}; >> var itr1 = ofCollection(); >> var itr2 = iter1.constructor(); //TypeError >> > > That wouldn't be a type error. It would be invoking the value of the > inherited generator property. > Sorry, "...inherited *constructor* property" that is. > > > >> >> Allowing such constructor access seems like an unnecessary (and possibly >> undesireable) capability when you just passing generator instances around >> to be used as iterators. Anybody disagree? >> >> itr1 instanceof ofCollection >> >> still works (subject to the usual instanceof caveats) >> >> Allen >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> >> > > > -- > Cheers, > --MarkM > -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
