Math.minmax

kai zhu kaizhu256 at gmail.com
Sat Oct 7 03:59:35 UTC 2017


on tc39 criterias, this applies more to language-spec than library changes, but i think another criteria that can showstop stage 2-3 proposals is finding out whether a new syntax creates subtle engine de-optimizations that breaks the web.

around mid-2016, i recall sites like github.com and npmjs.com using readme.md as their landing-page would frequently freeze and crash in chrome. each time, i basically could not use chrome to visit these sites for a week or so until chrome auto-updated. this issue may or may not be related to javascript, but it hardened my conservative-perspective on proposals that can negatively impact the web.

> On Oct 3, 2017, at 1:38 AM, Ben Newman <benjamin at cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
> 
> Taking a step back from the details of this proposal, I have some thoughts about why it seems to be struggling to find support.
> 
> In no particular order, I would say this proposal
> relies on microbenchmarks, which can be misleading <https://tomdale.net/2017/07/adventures-in-microbenchmarking/>
> disregards Amdahl's Law <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law>, by pretending that real-world JS CPU usage is commonly/ever dominated by min/max computations
> replaces two O(n) loops with another O(n) loop that does slightly more work on each iteration, resulting in no complexity improvement, and a fairly modest (< 2x) constant factor improvement
> doesn't seem to provide usability/learnability improvements for any particular group of JS developers (for example, novice programmers)
> doesn't seem to prevent any common bugs in JS code
> As a member of TC39, I regret that we have not provided a clearer set of criteria for what it takes to get a new function into the standard library. While I can't speak for the committee as a whole, my suspicion is that this proposal is unlikely to meet that standard. It's a fine idea, but so are many other functions that you can implement in a normal (non-standard) library.
> 
> I would also challenge the committee to think about (or link to!) any concrete written criteria that someone with an idea for a proposal could use to assess its chances of acceptance. Imagine how much time we could save!
> 
> Ben
> 
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 12:12 PM Xavier Stouder <xavier at stouder.io <mailto:xavier at stouder.io>> wrote:
> JDecker: Just added your solution on the benchmark, it beats every
> others solution and it's a elegant solution.
> 
> Kai Zhu: We can't see the screenshot. But please take in consideration
> that it's been a long time that ECMAScript isn't only used in webapp,
> and that some of applications using it can eat more than a million
> numbers.
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20171007/fbbe5344/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list