If I was a programmer looking for something like weak referencing in JS for the first time, "weak" is what I'd be searching for.
But if you're actually aware of weakrefs (as I am), and you're searching for them in JS (as I was), and you see "WeakMap" (as I did), and you make the conclusion that "Weak" in the name means in fact weak references (as I did), then you probably also (as I did) assume that *all* the refs are weak. That's a failed conclusion, because only the keyrefs are weak.
The name doesn't do anything to enlighten you that it only offers weak keyrefs and not weak valuerefs -- in fact, by your "discovery" line of reasoning, the name is almost a landmine that traps/misleads someone who does in fact know about weakrefs -- someone who didn't know about weakrefs wouldn't necessarily make the same deductive assumption by seeing "weak" in the name.
Misleading/confusing with an API name is, IMHO, worse than less implementation-self-descriptive naming.
--Kyle _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
