[Bug 26183] make it easier to define an iterator on an interface that iterates over a set of values from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org on 2014-10-02 (public-script-coord@w3.org from October to December 2014)

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 23:24:36 +0000
To: public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-26183-3890-LslEpnrhWJ@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26183

--- Comment #26 from Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> ---
(In reply to Domenic Denicola from comment #24)
> I think you should get keys(), values(), and entries() for free whenever
> possible. Possible size too. See
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26183#c3

Yes I'll make iterable<> add those automatically, but legacyiterable<> leave
them out.  I'm not sure about size, particularly because you might have an
object that can iterate over an unknown-at-iteration-start-time list of values.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Received on Thursday, 2 October 2014 23:24:38 UTC