Rick I tend to aree with you if not that the second argument of Object.create has basically reached zero libraries and popularity out there due un-shimmable and "boring to write" common/usual properties.
In this very specific case it would be inconsistent with the previous argument too since that won't be checked through getOwnPropertyNames in any case ... you know what I mean? Cheers On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It's now or never. I agree multiple sources are useful enough to do now; >> I don't see a different third parameter that would be precluded by deciding >> this. But others may disagree. >> > > A third Properties argument that matches the second Properties argument to > Object.create() and Object.defineProperties > > class Cycle { > constructor(details) { > Object.assign(this, details, { > wheels: { > value: details.type === "tricycle" ? 3 : 2, > configurable: false, > writable: false > } > }); > } > } > > var trike = new Cycle({ > color: "red", > type: "tricycle" > }); > > ... Which doesn't break the reduce pattern since the index would > effectively be meaningless in that context, ie. > Object.getOwnPropertyNames(Object(1)).length === 0; > > Anyway...I had originally pushed for Object.assign with multiple sources > and dropped it when consensus seemed to hinge on "one target, one source". > The third Properties argument is compelling and doesn't prevent using > Object.assign as a primitive mechanism for library code to build on top of. > > Rick > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
