Intent to Ship: Object.values() and Object.entries()

[Caitlin Potter]

Contact emails

ca...@igalia.com

Spec

Stage 4 TC39 Proposal at http://tc39.github.io/proposal-object-values-entries/ [1]

Summary

Introduces methods like Object.keys() [2] which will produce an Array containing the values (or entry pairs, as in Array.prototype.entries()) of enumerable properties, in enumeration order.

These are more or less analogous to the popular Lodash library methods _.values(<object>) [3] and _.toPairs(<object>) (now aliased as _.entries(<object>) [4].

Have been implemented in V8 in early Q1 2016 [5], and staged in early Q2 2016 [6]

Interoperability and Compatibility Risk

Feature is late stage in the TC39 process, and will be incorporated into ECMA262 in the near future. It is currently implemented by several vendors:

- Implemented in Mozilla FireFox [7]

- Implemented in ChakraCore [8]

OWP launch tracking bug

See [9] for launch tracking bug

Entry on the feature dashboard

See [10] for feature dashboard entry

[1] http://tc39.github.io/proposal-object-values-entries/

[2] https://tc39.github.io/ecma262/#sec-object.keys

[3] https://lodash.com/docs#values

[4] https://lodash.com/docs#toPairs

[5] https://crrev.com/677be73e767f93741204f07061f0216485086f99

[6] https://crrev.com/008981cf12e9b9049cbd25b216e80fe45cd6e172

[7] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1208464

[8] https://github.com/Microsoft/ChakraCore/commit/83c8a120ba568b90b520d0aa1528cd85dc31cf35

[9] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/v8/issues/detail?id=4663

[10] https://www.chromestatus.com/features/5710160244768768

[Caitlin Potter]

+blink-dev

[PhistucK]

The post itself seems to be missing. :(

☆PhistucK

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Caitlin Potter <caitpo...@gmail.com> wrote:

+blink-dev

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org.

[Caitlin Potter]

It's in v8-users, here's a copy :x

[PhistucK]

Are the implementations interoperable? Does V8 pass all of the relevant test262 tests?

(By the way, I suggest adding these questions to the standard V8 intent template)

☆PhistucK

[Caitlin Potter]

V8 passes all of the relevant test262 tests included in the current test262 roll.

Regarding interop, there's a bug in the current FireFox implementation (so they do not totally conform to the specification at this time), but I believe the feature is enabled in FF nightly only at the moment, and is not going to result in issues with real content on the web.** --- however I will file a bug shortly.

**I may be wrong about the "unshipped" bit, https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1232639 looks like it shipped the feature to FF47, but that's still a ways off

[PhistucK]

Thank you. :)

☆PhistucK

[Caitlin Potter]

I was mistaken, the FireFox bug was just a symptom of a well known Symbol not being present yet in FireFox.

So, there are no known compat/interop concerns with FireFox.

[Adam Klein]

LGTM to ship, given the stage 4 state of the spec and our compat with the test262 tests.