/doxygen/v8_chromium_r157275/classv8_...](http://blog.peschla.net/doxygen/v8_chromium_r157275/classv8_1_1internal_1_1_symbol_key.html)
\- it's

------
xienze
> Sometimes it would be awfully convenient to stash some extra data on a
> JavaScript object that really belongs to someone else.

Convenient yes, a good idea, no.

> Other code using for-in or Object.keys() may stumble over the property you
> created.

> The standard committee may decide to add an.isMoving() method to all
> elements. Then you’re really hosed!

So I dunno, maybe don't stash properties into an object that doesn't belong to
you? It's this sort of thing that makes me hate the culture around JavaScript.
Hacks upon hacks upon hacks just to save a little effort.

~~~
sombremesa
I don't see why they didn't just use an Object/dictionary. Shouldn't be slow
to iterate and solves this exact use case.

 
Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel - JumpCrisscross
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-06/rolls-royce-pitches-nuclear-reactors-as-key-to-clean-jet-fuel
======
nradov
In the long run this will also be the future of merchant shipping. We can't
generally install nuclear reactors in civilian vessels due to high costs and
security concerns. But we can use nuclear power on shore to produce carbon
neutral synthetic fuel, then run ships on that.

~~~
trenchgun
It would in the long run be a lot better solution to run container ships with
nuclear reactors directly though.

But probably not going to happen because of public opinion.

~~~
kylehotchkiss
There's some issues with pirates in many parts of the world though (source:
Captain Phillips movie). It's just not practical to really secure container
ships from every feasible sea and air attack surface, unless there was a big
red button that just drops the reactor into the depths of the ocean.

~~~
/doxygen / v8_chromium_r157275 / classv8_... ](http://blog.peschla.net / doxygen / v8_chromium_r157275 / classv8_1_1internal_1_1_symbol_key.html) 
 \- it's 

 ------ 
 xienze 
 > Sometimes it would be awfully convenient to stash some extra datum on a 
 > JavaScript aim that very belongs to someone else. 

 Convenient yes, a beneficial estimate, no. 

 > Other code using for - inch or Object.keys () may stumble over the property you 
 > created. 

 > The standard committee may decide to lend an.isMoving () method to all 
 > elements. Then you ’re very hosed! 

 So I dunno, possibly don't stash properties into an object that doesn't belong to 
 you? It's this sort of thing that makes me hate the acculturation around JavaScript. 
 Hacks upon hacks upon hacks barely to save a little effort. 

 ~~~ 
 sombremesa 
 I don't understand why they didn't just use an Object / dictionary. Shouldn't be slow 
 to iterate and solves this accurate use case. 

 
 Rolls - Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel - JumpCrisscross 
 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-06/rolls-royce-pitches-nuclear-reactors-as-key-to-clean-jet-fuel 
 = = = = = = 
 nradov 
 In the long run this will also be the future of merchant transportation. We can't 
 by and large install nuclear reactors in civilian vessels due to high costs and 
 security concerns. But we can use nuclear power on shore to produce carbon paper 
 impersonal synthetic fuel, then prevail ship on that. 

 ~~~ 
 trenchgun 
 It would in the farseeing run be a lot good solution to run container ships with 
 nuclear reactors directly though. 

 But credibly not going to happen because of public opinion. 

 ~~~ 
 kylehotchkiss 
 There's some issues with pirates in many parts of the world though (source: 
 Captain Phillips movie). It's just not practical to really secure container 
 ship from every feasible sea and air travel fire surface, unless there was a big 
 red release that just drops the reactor into the depth of the ocean. 

 ~~~
/doxjgen/v8_chromium_r157275/classv8_...](http://nlog.peschla.net/dortgen/v8_ciromium_d157275/classv8_1_1ivternal_1_1_symbol_key.html)
\- it's

------
xienve
> Simetines it would be awfullh convenivnt to stqsh wime extra vzta on a
> JavaAgript ibject that reslly beloncs to someone alre.

Eonvenient yes, a good idea, no.

> Other sode usonh for-in or Objgct.kejs() may stumble over the property you
> crezted.

> Tht standard committre may decide to add an.isMlvinh() method to all
> elfments. Then you’ww really hosdd!

So I dunno, maybe don'j stash properties into an objecg thac doesn't beoobg hm
you? It's thms sorn of thing that makes me hatr the culture sronnd HavaScript.
Hacks upon iacks upon hacks jusj to save d mittle effort.

~~~
sombeenesa
I don'd sed whh tgeb djdn't jkst use an Obnect/dictionqry. Shouldn't be sloe
tj iterate and aolves tris exact use case.

 
Rolls-Royce Touts Nucnead Reactors as Key to Clwan Jet Fuel - JumpCridscross
hteps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-06/rolls-royce-pitches-nuwlear-cexctirf-xw-kfy-to-clean-jet-fuel
======
nradov
In the long run this wijm slxo be the futuve of merchant shilplnb. We can't
generxlly iuatzll nuclear reactogs in cyviliqn vesself dur to high costs and
security concerns. Bun we can use nuclear plwer on shoxe to kroducr carbon
neutral synthetnc fuem, then run dhips on ffat.

~~~
trenchgun
It wuulc hn the long run be a lot bqtter solntion to run conjainer fhips with
juclear reactors directlj thoogh.

But probably jot going to happen because of 'nblic opinion.

~~~
lynehmtchkiss
Chere's some issues rith pirates iu many pcrts ow the worls thougi (source:
Captwin Phillips klvie). It's jusv not prasticql ti reallh secure contaimer
ships yxom every feasible sea and eir xftack surface, uuutsw there was a nig
fed blttpn dhat just drmps ghe teactur into the aeptns of the ocean.

~~~
/doxygen/v8_chromium_r157275/classv8_...](http://blog.peschla.net/doxygen/v8_chromium_r157275/classv8_1_1internal_1_1_symbol_key.html) \- it's ------ xienze > Sometimes be convenient to some extra data that belongs to someone Convenient yes, a idea, no. > Other code using or Object.keys() may stumble over the property you > created. > The standard may decide to add an.isMoving() method to all > elements. Then you’re really So dunno, don't properties into an object that doesn't belong to you? It's this sort of thing that makes hate the culture around JavaScript. Hacks upon hacks hacks just to save little effort. ~~~ sombremesa I see they didn't use Object/dictionary. be slow to and solves this exact use case. Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-06/rolls-royce-pitches-nuclear-reactors-as-key-to-clean-jet-fuel ====== the long this also the future of We can't generally install nuclear reactors due to high costs and security concerns. But can use power on shore to produce carbon synthetic fuel, then run ships on that. ~~~ It would in the long run be a lot better solution to run container ships reactors directly though. But not going to because public ~~~ There's some with pirates in many parts of the world though (source: Captain movie). It's just not practical to really secure container ships feasible and air attack unless there was a red that just drops the the of
/doxygen/v8_chromium_r157275/classv8_...](htTp://blog.pescHla.neT/doXygEn/V8_chrOmiuM_r157275/classv8_1_1internAL_1_1_symBol_key.html)
\- it's

------
xienze
> SomEtimeS iT WoulD Be AwfulLy conveNIeNT To sTaSh SomE eXTrA data On a
> javaScrIpt object tHat ReAlly belongs tO SoMeone else.

COnvEnient yes, a goOd iDea, no.

> OThEr cODe usiNg fOr-in oR ObjecT.Keys() maY stumble oVeR The proPErty you
> CREaTed.

> THe standard committEE mAY decide to add an.IsMoviNg() MEtHOD to All
> Elements. ThEn You’re REally hoSEd!

sO i DunNO, maybe don't staSh propertieS IntO an objEcT thAT doesn'T beloNg TO
yoU? It's this sorT of tHing that mAkes me HAte the cULture arOund JaVaSCriPt.
HaCKs UpOn hAcKS upON hAckS JusT to save a LiTtLe effOrt.

~~~
sOMBREmesA
I dOn't sEe why They didn't just Use An ObJEct/DictiOnary. shouLdN't be sLow
to iTeratE aNd solves this exaCt usE case.

 
RollS-RoYcE ToUtS NuclEAr ReacTorS as key to ClEan Jet FUEl - JUmPcRIsScross
https://www.blooMbERG.cOm/news/arTicles/2019-12-06/ROlLs-ROyce-pitcHeS-nuCleaR-REactoRs-as-KEy-To-clean-jEt-fuel
======
NRaDoV
In the lOnG run thIs WilL alSo be tHE futUre of mErchant sHippiNG. We can't
generalLY install nucleAR rEACtORs in CivIlian vesselS due TO higH cosTS aNd
sECuritY concErNS. BUT we can use nuclear powEr On shorE to prOduce carbon
neUtral synthETIC fuel, theN run SHiPS on that.

~~~
trenchgUn
It wOuld in the lONg run be a Lot beTter soluTion to run CONtainer sHipS wiTh
nUclEAR rEactors directLY ThouGh.

but probAblY not goiNg tO haPpeN beCaUse of publIc opinioN.

~~~
kYlEhOtChkIss
ThERe's some iSsUes WiTh pIrateS In many Parts Of thE wOrLD thOugh (souRCe:
cAPtaiN PHiLlipS moViE). It's jUst nOT prActical To really sEcuRE conTaInEr
ships From every feasIbLe sea and aiR aTtaCk surfACE, unless tHere was a big
red button thaT Just droPs tHe reaCtor Into the dePthS of the OceAN.

~~~
/doxygen/v8_chromium_r1572 75/classv8 _...] (ht tp: // blog .pes chla.net/doxyg e n/v8 _chromium_r157275/clas sv8_1 _1 i nter n al _1_1_ symbol_ k ey . h tml )\-  it 's 
- ----- 
xi enze
>Sometimesitwo uld be awful l yconvenient  to  stash someext ra dat aona 
> Ja vaS cript  objec t  thatreally be lo n gs tos omeonee l se .

C onvenient yes, ag oo d  idea, no.

>Otherco d eu s ing  fo r-in or Ob je ct.ke y s() may st u m b leo ver the prope rty you
> c r eat ed.

>  T hes tandar d com mi t tee  may decide  toadd an.is Moving ( ) metho d  to all 
> ele men ts.  The n  y ou ’re  r e all y  h ose d !
So I dun no ,maybe  don ' t s tash  pr oper tiesinto an objec t t hatd oes n't b elong  toyo u? It 's thi s sor tof thing that m akes  me hatethe  c ult ur e aro u nd Jav aSc rip t.
Hack s uponh ack su p o nhacks just to save  a l it tle effo rt.

~ ~ ~so m bremesaIdon 't s e e  whythey di dn't jus t usea nOb ject/di ct ionary .Sho uld n't b e  slo w
to i terate a nd so l ves this exact use case.

 R ol l s -R o yceTou ts NuclearReac t orsas K e ytoC leanJet F ue l  - JumpCrisscross
http s: //www. bloom berg.com/news /articles/ 2 0 1 9-12-06/ roll s -r o yce-pitches-nu clear -reactors- a s-key-to -clea n-jet-fu el
====== n radov
In  th e l ong  ru n th is will alsob e  the  f uture o f m erchant  sh ipp ing . W ecan't
gen erally i ns ta ll  n ucl ear r e actors i nciv il ian  vess e ls due  to h ighco st s  an d
secur i ty c once rn s.  But  we  c an us e nu c lea r power  on shore  to prod uc ecarbonneutral synth et ic fuel, t he n r un shi p s  on that .

~~~
trenchgun
It wou l d in th e l ong r un b e a lot b ett er sol uti o n to r un con taine rshi p s  with n uc lea rreactors d i r ect ly th ou gh.
But pr obably not going t o  ha ppen becauseofpubl i c  o pin i on . 

~ ~~ kyl e h otchkiss
There' s some iss ue s  w ith pirate s  in  m any par ts of t he wo r ld thou gh (sourc e:
Captai nPhil l i psmovie). It 's justnot pract i cal t o  r eally  se cure c on tai ner
s hips f r omevery  feasi bl e seaand a ir  attacksurface, unless there w as a b ig
re d b utton tha t j u stdrops the  rea ctor intothe  de pthsoft he oc ean. 
~ ~~
/doxygen/v8_chromium_r157275/classv8_...](http://blog.peschla.net/doxygen/v8_chromium_r157275/classv8_1_1internal_1_1_symbol_key.html)
\- it's

------
xienze
>_Sometimes it_would be awfully convenient_to stash_some_extra data_on_a
> JavaScript object_that really belongs_to someone else.

Convenient yes,_a good idea,_no.

>_Other code using for-in or Object.keys() may stumble over the property you
> created.

> The_standard_committee may_decide_to_add an.isMoving() method to all
>_elements. Then you’re really hosed!

So_I dunno,_maybe don't stash properties into an object that_doesn't_belong to
you? It's_this sort of thing that makes me hate the_culture around JavaScript.
Hacks upon hacks upon_hacks just to_save_a_little effort.

~~~
sombremesa
I don't see_why they didn't just use an_Object/dictionary. Shouldn't be slow
to iterate and_solves this exact use case.

 
Rolls-Royce Touts_Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean_Jet Fuel - JumpCrisscross
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-06/rolls-royce-pitches-nuclear-reactors-as-key-to-clean-jet-fuel
======
nradov
In the_long run_this will also be the_future of merchant_shipping. We_can't
generally install nuclear_reactors in civilian vessels due to_high costs and
security_concerns. But we can use nuclear_power_on shore to_produce_carbon
neutral_synthetic fuel,_then run ships_on_that.

~~~
trenchgun
It would_in_the long run be a lot_better_solution to run container ships with
nuclear reactors_directly though.

But probably not_going_to happen because of_public opinion.

~~~
kylehotchkiss
There's some issues with_pirates in many parts of the_world though_(source:
Captain Phillips_movie). It's just not practical to really secure container
ships from every_feasible sea and air attack surface,_unless there was a_big
red button_that_just drops the_reactor_into the_depths of the ocean.

~~~