5 ms·

Worth noting that Safari Technology Preview was the first browser to support all of ECMAScript 2016+ features. * http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es2016plu

• smitherfield 9y ago
  Although IIRC Chrome and/or Firefox had all but guaranteed tail-call optimization (not a source code-level feature, obviously) first.
  • pizlonator 9y ago
    I don’t think that’s right. Source?
    • smitherfield 9y ago
      Just Chrome, but yes: http://web.archive.org/web/20160303192336/http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/ http://web.archive.org/web/20160303192336/http://kangax.gith...
      • pizlonator 9y ago
        That shows WebKit supporting tailcalls. It doesn’t a show Chrome supporting tail calls. I vividly remember us implementing tail calls and v8 not having them yet at that time. This was almost 2 years ago.
        • smitherfield 9y ago
          That's what I said.
          • pizlonator 9y ago
            Chrome and WebKit are two different things. So, no, you didn’t just say that.
            • deecewan 9y ago
              He said that chrome and Firefox had everything except for tail call optimisation earlier.
              • pizlonator 9y ago
                Ha! I read your comment as: Chrome had tail calls first, but they were all but guaranteed. I was confused, but once I parsed your sentence that way there was no going back. I am now in agreement with everything you said. Thanks for clarifying.
              • saamyjoon 9y ago
                FWIW, I don’t think this is accurate (not that it really matters much anymore). All the browsers were in the 90+% support around the same time.
        • justabystander 9y ago
          Chrome has had them for a while. Supposedly they just hid them behind a flag because they weren't satisfied with some perceived deficiencies in the spec. (Check out https://v8project.blogspot.com/2016/04/es6-es7-and-beyond.html. https://v8project.blogspot.com/2016/04/es6-es7-and-beyond.ht...) WebKit did have it somewhere between mid-October to early December of 2015. (http://web.archive.org/web/20151207203829/http://kangax.github.io:80/compat-table/es6/ http://web.archive.org/web/20151207203829/http://kangax.gith...) Chrome didn't get it until late April of the next year (http://web.archive.org/web/20160526102037/http://kangax.github.io:80/compat-table/es6/ http://web.archive.org/web/20160526102037/http://kangax.gith...), though there's no snapshot until late May. People worked on the spec in a different order. Chrome also had a failing array prototype under some non-standard syntax for a while. Despite claiming 100%, Kangax didn't show them passing. Test results have fluctuated as the tests themselves were refined. I've seen some passing results later turn into fails. That's why none of the browsers are at 100% for ES6 currently. I'm still grudging at Apple for the year's delay between Safari 9 and 10, which left all the clueless Apple customers on ~53% ES6. Yes, WebKit had regular updates, but they didn't do a gradual release and few people thought to install WebKit instead of Safari (or even the TP). Other browsers had much better beta channels than Apple. And didn't pointlessly delay on things like WebRTC. Or block other browser engines like iOS to protect their app store. Chrome did a good job of releasing updates gradually, but there are still some ES6 performance issues to be ironed out.
          • pjmlp 9y ago
            We still need to target things like IE 9 or older FF ESR releases, so Safari current status is already pretty advanced.
          • alwillis 9y ago
            I'm still grudging at Apple for the year's delay between Safari 9 and 10, which left all the clueless Apple customers on ~53% ES6. But Apple got to 100% ES6 support before anyone else: https://twitter.com/webkit/status/728643624464883712?lang=en https://twitter.com/webkit/status/728643624464883712?lang=en
• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]