On Sep 26, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Rick Waldron wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Erik Arvidsson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> No surprise here, but I also support using "@" methods.
>
> I don't. Please see my response to Kevin Smith:
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-September/033720.html
>
>
> I'm also in
> favor of making methods non enumerable by default. This makes them
> more consistent with what we have in ES today.
>
> That might be the case for methods defined on prototypes of built-in objects,
> but it's absolutely not the case for user land code. Please see the examples
> in my previous response to Allen:
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-September/033725.html
>
so name your events property "@RickWaldron@events".
If somebody subclasses Emitter and know that property name, then they must be
doing something intentional.
Unique Symbols don't guarantee that sort of integrity. All you've accomplish by
using them as in your example is to minimize that chance that somebody else
doesn't accidentally use the same property name for some other purpose. Naming
your property "@RickWaldron@events" also makes such accidentally unlikely.
Allen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
