I'm excited about pushing UTF8 as far as possible!
One thing not mentioned in the notes is that Spidermonkey is adding Latin-1
string support, so hopefully it will be pretty easy to avoid converting
ASCII-only strings at WebIDL boundaries. It would certainly be ideal if
Spidermonkey eventually sup
On 7/7/14, 10:01 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
One thing not mentioned in the notes is that Spidermonkey is adding Latin-1
string support, so hopefully it will be pretty easy to avoid converting
ASCII-only strings at WebIDL boundaries.
Note that they also are adding GC-unstable string chars, so
Are UTF8-backed (as opposed to Latin1-backed) JS strings with random access
going to be a real possibility in SpiderMonkey? It’s obviously possible to make
random access work with an appropriate indexing data structure, but popular JS
benchmarks are pretty sensitive to string performance.
Camer
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote:
> Are UTF8-backed (as opposed to Latin1-backed) JS strings with random access
> going to be a real possibility in SpiderMonkey? It’s obviously possible to
> make random access work with an appropriate indexing data structure, but
> popular
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote:
> Are UTF8-backed (as opposed to Latin1-backed) JS strings with random
> access going to be a real possibility in SpiderMonkey? It’s obviously
> possible to make random access work with an appropriate indexing data
> structure, but popular JS
> > Are UTF8-backed (as opposed to Latin1-backed) JS strings with random access
> > going to be a real possibility in SpiderMonkey? It’s obviously possible to
> > make random access work with an appropriate indexing data structure, but
> > popular JS benchmarks are pretty sensitive to string perfor
6 matches
Mail list logo
