Twitter | Search | |
BrendanEich
I presented to Ecma TC39 today: Int64 & Uint64 are now Stage 1 proposals for an ECMA-262 future edition, AKA "JS".
Reply Retweet Like More
BrendanEich Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
We're finally adding 64-bit ints to JS. It should've happened sooner (see slide 4, esp. super-important "Insight: inducting ..." 5th item).
Reply Retweet Like
BrendanEich Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
Scope creep, as ever, is The Enemy. Also still true: the Multiplication Principle hurts a lot when (contemplating) chaining risks.
Reply Retweet Like
Doctor ₿ Goss, MD Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
whoa…I can't count that high…
Reply Retweet Like
BrendanEich Nov 30
Replying to @_drgo
Your computer can, in addressing memory and seeking in files.
Reply Retweet Like
↙↙↙ so tab today Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
Yay, so happy to read these slides! I can provide use-cases for growth from CSSWG; looks good so far tho.
Reply Retweet Like
↙↙↙ so tab today Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
Really just look at and sigh. This should be value types, not objects!
Reply Retweet Like
↙↙↙ so tab today Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
It looks like maybe, in current proposal, we'd have to make the CalcLength the underlying value type, which isn't great.
Reply Retweet Like
↙↙↙ so tab today Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
Ideally we'd be able to have `20px` just store the single "20" number, and then up-convert when added to another type.
Reply Retweet Like
↙↙↙ so tab today Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
(Via an explicit set of operator overloads, if necessary; no need for "implicit" conversion. n^2, but n is smallish.)
Reply Retweet Like
↙↙↙ so tab today Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
(Well, n=16 and will get larger over time, so 256+ overloads if you have to be super explicit.)
Reply Retweet Like
#BarelyProgrammer Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich @_drgo
also there's more money in the world than i32 :p
Reply Retweet Like
Tony Arcieri Nov 30
I remember when you demoed them at a few years ago. Glad to see them actually shipping, I need them!
Reply Retweet Like
BrendanEich Nov 30
Replying to @wycats @_drgo
but more than 2**53?
Reply Retweet Like
BrendanEich Nov 30
Yeah, I had a spidermonkey prototype impl, bitrotted fatally by now.
Reply Retweet Like
Timothy Soehnlin Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
Does the slide on the Decimal value class imply a potentiality for operator overloading?
Reply Retweet Like
BrendanEich Nov 30
Replying to @arciisine
Yes, on agenda per slide 5 and past slide decks at (look for operators in title; note obsolete content).
Reply Retweet Like
Timothy Soehnlin Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich
I saw that, is that only intended for numerics or all types in general?
Reply Retweet Like
#BarelyProgrammer Nov 30
Replying to @BrendanEich @_drgo
no, but there are more nanoseconds in a century ;)
Reply Retweet Like
BrendanEich Nov 30
Replying to @arciisine
Operators for all types, but some hills to climb to get there.
Reply Retweet Like