The current definition in 1.2.2 of what Map(o) does is a harmful dead end. The
current behavior is:
- If o is already a Map then leave it alone.
- Otherwise enumerate the visible properties of o and construct a Map out of
those.
This is harmful because it's guaranteed to cause current and futu
> -Original Message-
> From: David Teller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 21. mars 2008 08:08
> To: Lars Hansen
> Cc: es4-discuss@mozilla.org
> Subject: RE: ES4 draft LAST CALL: Map
>
> On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 14:46 +, Lars Hansen wrote:
> > My opinion
On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 14:46 +, Lars Hansen wrote:
> My opinion is that if there are features that are primarily useful for
> concurrency (and it sounds like what you have in mind is that) then we
> should not try to guess about them until we start talking about
> concurrency in earnest.
>
> --
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Teller
> Sent: 21. mars 2008 03:26
> To: es4-discuss@mozilla.org
> Subject: Re: ES4 draft LAST CALL: Map
>
> I have a question related to collections in general.
>
> I have the impression that ES4 will someday accept some kind
> of high-level
I have a question related to collections in general.
I have the impression that ES4 will someday accept some kind of high-level
concurrency, possibly Erlang-style. If so, we will probably need the ability to
perform some kind of (destructive) pattern-matching/switch-type on the contents
of a co
Last call for comments. Minor changes since previous drafts (and some
comments at the beginning to address changes that are known to come).
--lars
Title: The class "Map"
The class Map
NAME: "The class 'Map'"
FILE: spec/library/Map.html
CATE
