On Monday, August 27, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
> Kevin Smith wrote:
> > Isn't there a name that we already use for alternative constructors:
> > create?
> >
> > let object = Object.create(null);
> > let array = Array.create("A", "B", "C");
> >
>
>
> If only create weren't used for Object.create, which takes a pdmap as
> second parameter. That is a complicated beast, with the wrong defaults
> for writable configurable and arguably enumerable.
>
> The Ruby precedent for Array.new appeals to me (and I'm not a Rubyist).
>
> I could live with Array.of but even ignoring search-engine usability,
> using a preposition for a constructor name, rather than a verb or a
> verb'ed adjective, counts against it a tiny bit IMHO.
>
>
Regardless of its repositioning on the right as a property, I would intuitively
expect "new" to behave the same way it would as its operator equivalent (for
all constructors, not just Array). By no means do I wish to be combative, but I
feel strongly that repurposing the same word is user hostile.
Rick
>
> /be
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > es-discuss mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
