On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]>wrote:
> Despite my comments about not letting archaic browsers dictate our future, > which still stands... > > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Andrea Giammarchi < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I agree add/remove is more semantic as put/delete would be. > > > I also complete agree with the intuitiveness of add/remove over add/delete > +1 in agreement here. > > >> I also said that m.delete is problematic for shims, not because of >> missing m["delete"] possibility, simply because it looks really ugly to >> >> m.add(stuff); >> m["delete"](stuff); >> > > ...But you would never have to do this in any browser that has correctly > implemented *Identifier, **IdentifierName *and* ReservedWord *semantics. > Non-Browser JS can implement this with minimal, if not zero, adverse effect. > We should not underestimate the amount of help that shims have been for moving real world development towards standards. Its nice to be principled about how it shouldn't matter with correct implementations, but if we can make the transition easier why not? If people are forced to build their own abstractions (instead of just shims) then it creates problems with needing certain libraries, or having differences between libraries. Sometimes its inevitable, but here I see no gain for keeping it delete. - Russ
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
