On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.org> wrote:
> Shijun He wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Rick Waldron<waldron.r...@gmail.com**> >> wrote: >> >>> 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 >>> >> >> I agree you 'new' should match constructor, except Array. Array >> constructor is broken (that's why we need Array.of/new/create >> whatever) and NO ONE really use Array constructor at all (programmers >> are educated to use literal initializer instead). >> > > Too true. > > Rick, it's important not to make a false idol out of precedent. You're absolutely right, sometimes my intentions to speak for the wider population act as blinders. > When people want an Array constructor, they don't think "especially one > that treats the case where it is called with a single argument of number > type as a request to make an array with that many holes"! You got me there :P Rick > > > /be >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
