On Dec 31, 2013, at 2:38 PM, Rick Waldron wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com> wrote:
>
> On Dec 31, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
>
>> David Bruant wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>> I haven't had a use for a .reduce yet, but maybe that would make sense too?
>>
>> Are Sets ordered just because for-of says so? :-P
>
> Actually, according to the spec. they are ordered, but this is only currently observable via for-of.
>
> And the existing .forEach, right?
right
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20131231/820d7273/attachment.html>
domenic at domenicdenicola.com (2014-01-06T14:13:16.586Z)
On Dec 31, 2013, at 2:38 PM, Rick Waldron wrote:
> And the existing .forEach, right?
right
