- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 18:01:31 -0700
On May 19, 2007, at 4:27 PM, Dean Edwards wrote: > Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >> On May 18, 2007, at 10:14 PM, liorean wrote: >>> On 19/05/07, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote: >>>> The "uniqueID" thing is really working around a deficiency in JS >>>> (inability to use objects as keys). I think that's where it >>>> should be >>>> addressed. The uniqueID idea has a number of rather unique >>>> implementation >>>> difficulties. The obvious implementations have security and privacy >>>> implementations; the solutions to those tend to be expensive >>>> either in RAM >>>> or CPU. I recommend bringing this to the attention of the ES4 >>>> group. >>> >>> ES4 already has something of the kind. See >>> <uri:http://developer.mozilla.org/es4/proposals/hashcodes.html> >>> >>> However, that is not usable in ES3 implementations, which uniqueID >>> is. >> The hashcode() function is a library function and could be added to >> ES3 implementations - I'd be willing to support it for WebKit. It >> should be noted though that it has the same security/privacy issues >> as uniqueID: > > This is all relevant of course but the DOM API is language agnostic. > This feature is too important to leave to scripting language > implementations. To my knowledge, most non-JavaScript programming languages already have facilities for hashing on object identity. This is true at least of C++, Java, Objective-C and C; it also appears to be true of Python, Ruby, Perl and C# as far as I can tell from the docs. What language besides JavaScript are you concerned about? Note that hascode() would be more general than uniqueID since it applies even to non-DOM objects; it would still be needed in JavaScript even if uniqueID was added to the DOM. Regards, Maciej
Received on Saturday, 19 May 2007 18:01:31 UTC