| 00:32 | <ljharb> | weird. text is
|
| 00:49 | <Rob Palmer> | Yep. When I long press to reply, I see that text. |
| 00:51 | <Rob Palmer> | I am super curious to discover what programmatic condition causes this erasure. |
| 00:53 | <Rob Palmer> | Please could someone else with an iPhone reply to the original message with the same text as Jordan. |
| 17:12 | <snek> | it would be very handy in this webtransport implementation i wrote. but fyi on "will not be used in browsers", browsers already have indexeddb.cmp which can compare typedarrays so its not new functionality for them. |
| 17:13 | <snek> | my problem is actually that i'm not in a browser, or i'd just use that |
| 17:15 | <bakkot> | it's true that browsers already contain a lot of garbage, indexeddb included, but I don't want that to be a reason to add more |
| 17:15 | <bakkot> | ("I have an actual use case in the browser" is a perfectly good reason, to be clear; I'm not saying I'm opposed to this, just that I want it to have at least some compelling motivating use cases in browsers specifically) |
| 17:19 | <snek> | huh does using not work with destructuring :( |
| 17:20 | <snek> | i don't know that the use cases are browser or non-browser specific. do you mean a use case specifically tailored to a browser or just something that isn't explicitly not browser? |
| 17:20 | <bakkot> | not explicitly not browser |
| 17:20 | <bakkot> | specifically I think of tests as being not-browser (for example) |
| 17:20 | <bakkot> | or at least not-production-browser |
| 17:21 | <snek> | there are a lot of results for indexedDB.cmp on github |
| 17:22 | <snek> | though a good portion of them do actually involve real indexeddb usage |