Re: Adoption of the Typed Array Specification

On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Oliver Hunt <> wrote:
> The data is mutable, the length is not -- this is more in line with arrays in other languages, but more importantly the whole point of the typed array spec was to provide a compact typed storage mechanism.  Allowing the length to be changed runs counter to this as it effectively puts us back in the position of supporting sparse arrays.

I don't see why that's the case.  You can define the semantics such
that length-extension zero-fills (or NaN-fills, if you like to hurt
kittens) rather than permitting sparseness, and it would seem to meet
all the requirements of the typedarray spec.


Received on Friday, 14 May 2010 14:23:13 UTC