Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript Subject: Re: Multidimensional arrays in javascript Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 13:37:35 +0100 Organization: PointedEars Software (PES) Lines: 62 Message-ID: <7436839.Us7gLa2v5a@PointedEars.de> References: <09bd2043-74da-46b5-87ea-11e248847c36@googlegroups.com> Reply-To: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Trace: solani.org 1449232657 850 eJwFwYEBwDAIArCXxlTsPWj5/4QmFQSnk8Usl3cYtb+4wY7g12ldnaUu7GNLTMHYxLgfKcoR9w== (4 Dec 2015 12:37:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.solani.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 12:37:37 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: KNode/4.14.2 X-User-ID: eJwNycEBwCAIA8CVGgJRxxGU/Uew972goBqukEdHe8HPNbQKVqB4sRzK5eN/7IvOPvZpSEppGrk3eSpz9Xw+oxUs Cancel-Lock: sha1:AtUQWoEGZD7OemnQW4vataNEjAs= X-NNTP-Posting-Host: eJwNyMkBwCAIBMCWuHYl5aBC/yWYeQ6cyrOCYGAw3fTjTQTl76Zk6R13wVWzvTwKSVhp5Lf7AREjEGw= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:28966 John Harris wrote: > Up to and including ECMAScript version 5.1 the answer is no : there is > no such thing as a typed array. > > In ECMAScript version 6 there are typed array objects of various > types. There are no ECMAScript versions. To assume there were betrays a fundamental misconception about ECMAScript-based programming languages. Instead, there is an ECMAScript Language Specification that is published in _Editions_, and various different and differing implementations of it that are released as programming languages with version numbers. Several of those implementations have “JavaScript” in their name now (initially, there was only one such implementation, Netscape/Mozilla JavaScript; since Firefox 5 the version numbers of *Mozilla* JavaScript have been aligned with the Firefox version). (Probably someone has told you this before.) Also, typed arrays had already been available in several implementations before ECMAScript 2015/Edition 6 was finalized, voted on, and published; those were implementations of the 5.1 Edition, and earlier, at the time. This was possible because per the definitions in its “Conformance” section, all Editions of the Specification so far allowed it: | 2 Conformance | | A conforming implementation of ECMAScript must provide and support all the | types, values, objects, properties, functions, and program syntax and | semantics described in this specification. | | […] | | A conforming implementation of ECMAScript may provide additional types, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | values, objects, properties, and functions beyond those described in this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | specification. In particular, a conforming implementation of ECMAScript | may provide properties not described in this specification, and values for | those properties, for objects that are described in this specification. | | A conforming implementation of ECMAScript may support program and regular | expression syntax not described in this specification. […] (For the newest Edition, see ) The record shows that new Editions of the ECMAScript Language Specification always codified already implemented behavior, attempting to specify common features in existing implementations, and, by specifying them differently or not at all, deprecating features in and behavior of existing implementations that were unanimously considered unfavorable within the Ecma Technical Committee (TC) 39. See also the ECMAScript Support Matrix (“ES Matrix”) referenced in my signature. -- PointedEars FAQ: | SVN: Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.