On Apr 19, 2014, at 12:17 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: > Did you check against > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:enumeration which links off > to this es-discuss thread: > > https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2011-March/012965.html > > Sounds good, just asking for a look-back at the big thread and strawman to > see if there are any missing subtleties others have pointed out in the past.
In a separate message I made a change that addresses 32-bit value non-limits on index keys. I fairly arbitrarily separated the string and symbol keys groups. At the specific implementation level this might complicate (or possibly simplify) things, but it seems like a useful distinction for consumers of these key lists. For example, if you don't care about symbol keys you can stop iterating over the key array as soon as you encounter a symbol. If we didn't know that the web has property creation ordering dependencies I might have specified sorting the string keys (doesn't require recording property creation order). However, there is no natural sort order for symbols. > > /be > > Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: >> The ordering I propose is: >> 1) All array index property keys, in ascending array index numeric order. >> Followed by: >> 2) All other string property keys, in property creation order. Followed by: >> 3) All symbol property keys, in property creation order >> >> Does anybody see any reason why we shouldn't specify (this) property >> ordering? > _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
