>> What is the endgame? Add more terminology to the spec or try to define a >> term to be adopted into the spoken lexicon? >> >> The former doesn't currently have any ambiguity and the latter is tough >> because... >> >> 1. Most devs don't even use the term "accessor", instead they say >> "getter-setters" >> >> 2. Most devs will use "value" to describe a scalar and "object" or >> "reference" to describe an object... "data" is used to mean either/both >> (which is why Brendan's "value objects" makes complete sense: looks like a >> value, but is actually an object) >> >> 3. "method" is the only commonly used term > > Good points. > > Axel, I don't think "we" can redefine the jargon commonly used by JS > developers. It's enough to track and influence what's commonly written and > spoken. > > In the spec, even ignoring common usage, I would not try to mess with "data > property" right now. As Rick notes, "value" may be taken to mean "primitive, > not reference (object)."
Got it. Wanted to avoid NIH in my writings, but will try my best to keep my own terminology consistent. I thought value objects came from “compare by value”, but then I am still making Rick’s point. -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer [email protected] home: rauschma.de twitter: twitter.com/rauschma blog: 2ality.com
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
