On May 18, 2011, at 3:35 PM, Nebojša Ćirić wrote:
>> 4. Should we rename LocaleInfo.collator()/numberFormat()/dateTimeFormat()
>> into LocaleInfo.createCollator()...? It makes it clear we are creating new
>> object.
>
> The methods on the LocaleInfo constructor or are they really
> LocaleInfo.prototype methods. In other words are the results derived from a
> specific LocaleInfo instance or is the result some sort of global value that
> is independent of the instances. If the latter, why are they associated with
> the LocaleInfo constructor?
>
> They are prototypes:
>
> LocaleInfo.prototype.collator()
>
> I propose
>
> LocaleInfo.prototype.createCollator()
>
> since they actually create a new LocaleInfo.Collator (or DateTimeFormat or
> NumberFormat) objects based on that locale info.
>
It could go either way and there isn't a lot of relevant precedent in the ES
built-in libraries to guide this. If it is essential an characteristic that a
new object is being created I personally would be inclined to put something in
the name to indicate that. Personally I might use newXXX rather than createXXX.
The other possibility is that you could make them be constructor functions so
you would say:
var myDtf = new myLocale.DateTimeFormat(myOptions);
Since any native ES function can be used as a constructor (and will even do the
right thing if it is carefully code with that possibility in mind) I guess that
might argue for the non-imperative naming, particularly if it starts with an
upper case. Then either the above or
var myDtf = myLocale.DateTimeFormat(myOptions);
would be equivalent. I think they both read fine.
Allen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
