Optimization error in update operation #499
Conversation
anthony-redFox
changed the title
| @@ -23,6 +23,10 @@ function err(operation, expectedTarget, path) { | |||
| ); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| const tr = true; | |||
| const arrayMethods = {push: tr, unshift: tr, concat: tr, splice: tr, pop: tr, shift: tr}; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will be nice to use Set.
@Yomguithereal what do you think about drop IE9 and IE10?
|
Please don't
Den 29 dec. 2017 21:50 skrev "Anton" <[email protected]>:
… ***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In src/update.js
<#499 (comment)>:
> @@ -23,6 +23,10 @@ function err(operation, expectedTarget, path) {
);
}
+const tr = true;
+const arrayMethods = {push: tr, unshift: tr, concat: tr, splice: tr, pop: tr, shift: tr};
Will be nice to use Set.
@Yomguithereal <https://github.com/yomguithereal> what do you think about
drop IE9 and IE10?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#499 (review)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADYLwE7e8AdhPFplbsB1rxiUchMh5SaBks5tFVCLgaJpZM4RPYMx>
.
|
|
@Zache please don't, what? |
|
Drop support for IE9 and IE10
Den 30 dec. 2017 08:56 skrev "Anton" <[email protected]>:
… @Zache <https://github.com/zache> please don't, what?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#499 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADYLwGEVOXmiJ1-Exuf6HldAS244UADbks5tFeyggaJpZM4RPYMx>
.
|
|
@Zache Why do I ask?
Can you explain, why IE9 or IE10 still works for you? |
|
Hello @anthony-redFox. I don't really see the point of your PR. What are you trying to fix or enhance here? |
|
Hello, @Yomguithereal it is just optimization of throw a error and as result the bundle will be less size. |
|
@anthony-redFox. Your edit should produce more checks and conditions than before. I am not sure it improves performance. Since you test the existence of a string as an object key now. |
|
I agree with you that I added additional check. Also by benchmark nothing changed Baobab#get x 589,771 ops/sec ±0.76% (94 runs sampled) With patch Baobab#get x 595,541 ops/sec ±0.73% (95 runs sampled) If you still disagree with me, please close PR. |
|
Difference seems negligible and could be due to other factors affecting the engine outside of our control. No? |
|
Yes, right. |
|
Ok. I will close this then. Thanks for the contribution anyway @anthony-redFox. |
No description provided.