Benjamin Gruenbaum
Benjamin Gruenbaum
@mcollina the ask is for a more generic `stream.iterator` which is "give me a copy of this stream but don't take ownership of it, so I can consume parts of...
The problem is that then you'd have to add a `dropN` as well rather than have a solution for "I want to work with this stream and explicitly opt out...
@mcollina can you elaborate on the potential side effects so we know we're aware of all dangers when considering the feature? (other than obviously well, explicitly opting out of being...
Oh you meant the fact it's doing prototypical inheritance? That was just an example I am content with any solution really for example - with a proxy that forwards all...
> I think the proxy solution would suffer from the same problem of the prototypical inheritance. Why? Setting a property would set it on the target (the stream) directly >...
Actually doing a proxy wouldn't work precisely because we _need_ polymorphism for this to work (since the destroy call wouldn't go to the proxy). We need to combine both I...
I need to think more about this
I think this is currently blocked on us not yet figuring out how to actually do it correctly. Both the proxy solution and the prototype solution don't work particularly well.
@isaacs might have good feedback on this too
The actual approach looks neat and the changes look like the correct approach to do this. Still I have to ask - is this common enough to be in core...