Yet another attempt at typed JS data

Andrea Giammarchi andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com
Mon Feb 10 19:59:25 UTC 2020


They couldn't even optimize the most obvious case of them all:
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/v8/issues/detail?id=6892

And "javascript is not the best tool for the job" makes no sense when it's
the most targeted transpiled language, but fair enough.

And yes, I've used SQLite wasm version too ... as a matter of fact, it's
going to be a great lazy-loaded thing for my next project, 'cause it's 1MB
overhead, so not something to really promote in the wild, imho 😅

Regards.

On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 8:26 PM Bergi <a.d.bergi at web.de> wrote:

> Hello!
>
> > Unfortunately, `Array.from({ length: 4 }, () => whatever)` produces a
> holey
> > array
>
> Does it? But really, if the performance difference betweeen HOLEY and
> PACKED arrays were large enough to be relevant[1], the engine
> programmers would certainly already have optimised all those trivial
> cases where an array is filled gradually to produce the more efficient
> representation.
>
> kind regards,
>  Bergi
>
> [1]: it probably isn't:
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/54481918/#comment95848513_54485509
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200210/65c8c5c5/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list