On Sep 5, 2010, at 5:49 PM, Jürg Lehni wrote: > I would propose to name it Object.equals() as opposed to the unnecessary > short eq(), which does not seem right next to unnecessarily verbose function > names such as Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor()
"equals" or "equal" would be ok by me. eq is in line with Lisp tradition where the most discriminating equality operator is callsed "eq" or "eq?", but most JavaScripters would likely fail to catch the reference. Regards, Maciej > > Juerg > > On 5 Sep 2010, at 15:40, Mark S. Miller wrote: > >> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:egal >> >> I have previously taken the position on this list that we should not add a >> third equality construct to JavaScript. However, it is relevant to several >> other strawmen that are likely to advance -- hasCode, Maps and Sets. Also, >> its absence repeatedly bites me. I often accidentally code === when I mean >> Object.eq because it's so hard to remember when ==='s brokenness matters. >> Nevertheless, I am still ambivalent about adding it as standard equipment. >> Opinions? >> >> It is also on the agenda for the upcoming meeting. >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> --MarkM >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
