for-of loops, IteratorClose and the rest of the iterations in the spec

Allen Wirfs-Brock allen at
Wed Sep 10 08:25:32 PDT 2014

This sounds to me like it just need to be reported as a bug  There have been previous bugs that have identified places where library methods iterated in a manner that precluded implementing them via for-of. For example Those bugs were all fixed.

Of course it would be nice, if such a bug report actually identified the places where this is an issue.  It would be even better if the bug report include the suggest changes to the current algorithms.


On Sep 10, 2014, at 7:54 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:

> On 10 September 2014 16:52, Mark S. Miller <erights at> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Erik Arvidsson <erik.arvidsson at>
>> wrote:
>>> I see two options here.
>>> 1. Add IteratorClose to all places in the spec where we use iterators.
>> Why was #1 rejected? I just don't remember.
> I don't remember either, but one counter argument will be that it
> could be a performance hit. But if we are not willing to take this hit
> in our "own" functions then we should better not have this feature at
> all.
> /Andreas
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list