search

techfort / PowerArray

Boosted Performance Array
248 stars 16 forks source link

Document failed specs compliance #12

Closed DavidSouther closed 9 years ago

DavidSouther commented 9 years ago

Sure, your methods might be faster, but they fail horribly all over the spec. EG your forEach fails to handle this, and its underlying usage will fail for all the methods that depend on it. That's fine, but needs to be documented in bright flashing warning text as a caveat of using this utility.

techfort commented 9 years ago

You are absolutely right. Overclocking comes at a compliance price, and it should be clear in the readme, Will address this today.

DavidSouther commented 9 years ago

Congrats on getting in JSWeekly, btw ;)

DavidSouther commented 9 years ago

Not sure if you're just going to do a single warning, or actually go into the caveats, but:

techfort commented 9 years ago

I'll be quoting (and crediting) you in the readme with the above. I will also put a disclaimer that there may be other uncovered caveats, focus is on performance.

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 1:20 PM, David Souther notifications@github.com wrote:

Not sure if you're just going to do a single warning, or actually go into the caveats, but:

  • No this context in fn calls, handle your own binding.
  • No determination if i is a member of PowerArray (eg for sparse arrays, [2, 4, , 6])
  • No exception is thrown when the callback isn't callable.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/techfort/PowerArray/issues/12#issuecomment-64893184.

techfort commented 9 years ago

That's in the readme now, closing this.