Seeing as how there were no real objections to WeakMap, we have several +1
and one even I 3 (which I just learned means I heart/love), I have
renamed all non-historic occurrences of EphemeronTable on the wiki to
WeakMap. Unless someone objects, I will consider this naming issue closed.
Thanks
02, 2010 9:58 PM
To: David Herman
Cc: Mark S. Miller; es-discuss@mozilla.org; Erik Arvidsson
Subject: Re: We need to name EphemeronTable (was: Do we need an
experimental extension naming convention?)
On Jul 2, 2010, at 8:58 PM, David Herman wrote:
Cool. I'm warming to WeakMap as well. Do
Coming late to the party: 'alias' might be intuitive (from it's dictionary
definition and use in filesystems as a non-preserving way to give an alternate
name).
On 2010-07-03, at 00:57, Brendan Eich wrote:
On Jul 2, 2010, at 8:58 PM, David Herman wrote:
Cool. I'm warming to WeakMap as
Mark S. Miller wrote:
However, many objected to ephemeron as obscure
jargon. We have not yet settled the name we are giving this abstraction.
It is the language of GC implementors, and won't make sense to JS
programmers.
I'll be
happy with almost any name that everyone else can
On 2 Jul 2010, at 23:17, David Flanagan wrote:
Mark S. Miller wrote:
However, many objected to ephemeron as obscure
jargon. We have not yet settled the name we are giving this abstraction.
It is the language of GC implementors, and won't make sense to JS programmers.
I'll be happy
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:17 PM, David Flanagan da...@davidflanagan.comwrote:
Mark S. Miller wrote:
However, many objected to ephemeron as obscure
jargon. We have not yet settled the name we are giving this
abstraction.
It is the language of GC implementors, and won't make sense to JS
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Ash Berlin ash...@firemirror.com wrote:
On 2 Jul 2010, at 23:17, David Flanagan wrote:
Mark S. Miller wrote:
However, many objected to ephemeron as obscure
jargon. We have not yet settled the name we are giving this
abstraction.
It is the language
On Jul 2, 2010, at 3:17 PM, David Flanagan wrote:
Mark S. Miller wrote:
However, many objected to ephemeron as obscure
jargon. We have not yet settled the name we are giving this abstraction.
It is the language of GC implementors, and won't make sense to JS programmers.
I'll be happy
I'm opposed to anything that contains ephemer* in the name. Most JS
developers do not know what this means.
Both WeakMap and CacheMap seems acceptable with a slight favor for WeakMap.
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 16:40, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
I'm not sure if there is currently a
On Jul 2, 2010, at 7:45 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
I agree that EphemeronTable is too jargon-ish and may dissuade developers
from using it. I like Map better than Table as a suffix. Ephemeral is an
improvement, but it
Cool. I'm warming to WeakMap as well. Do we have any objections to WeakMap?
+1
I 3 WeakMap.
Dave
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
On Jul 2, 2010, at 7:45 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
I'm also in favour of a regular Map and Set. Also a dense List (i.e., what we
might have otherwise called an Array :(.) However, the history of oo class
libraries shows collection libraries to be a tarpit, so I'm unwilling to take
the lead
12 matches
Mail list logo
