On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Herman <dher...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On Nov 18, 2011, at 2:00 AM, Peter van der Zee wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:02 PM, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.com> > wrote: > >> On Nov 17, 2011, at 11:26 AM, Dean Landolt wrote: > >> > >>> Who can resist such a juicy bikeshed... > > > > Please keep the general js api consistent. > > A foolish consistency... > > We also use 'hasOwnProperty' and 'forEach' and 'toLocaleString' in JS. Why > not use those names? Because it's not the same operation. Neither is it the > same thing as .length. An array is a sequential data structure, so it uses > .length. A map and a set is not a sequential data structure, so it should > not. > As a thought experiment imagine someone were to propose Object.prototype.length -- what exactly would you expect that to mean? How would this be any different than Map.prototype.length? It'd be just as nonsensical. I could see `keyLength` being here, and something like `itemLength` being logical for sets, but these two concepts really are the same. It could also be said that a set's `itemLength` is the same concept as an array's. This merits a new property, delegating the length property where it makes sense (sequences). IMHO the `count` property captures this intension nicely. Something like this, perhaps: Object.prototype.count => total keys Map.prototype.count => total keys Set.prototype.count => total items Array.prototype.length => length Array.prototype.count => Array.prototype.length (sans holes?) String.prototype.length => length String.prototype.count => String.prototype.length
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
