On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
>> It should, as no length is assumed to mean "length === 0", IIUC, and
>> that seems so unintuitive to me that it sways my opinion towards not
>> imposing array-ness on the RHS.
>
> but that is exactly how it works everywhere else length is used in ES.
Who says 'length' is used by an array destructuring pattern. That should not be
assumed.
> So you would be fine with the fact that
>
> var r = Array.prototype.slice.call(0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2}, 0);
>
> produces [0,1]
>
> but
>
> var [...rx] = {0:0, 1:1, length: 2, 2:2};
>
> produces [0,1,2]
Even if Till would not (and it's clear you would not be fine with this outcome
;-), we have a choice. We can make array destructuring patterns that do not use
... ignore any RHS 'length' property. We could even forbid this kind of "row
capture" -- I'm not in favor.
Row capture in object patterns requires enumeration of RHS properties. Have you
worked on that case too?
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
