>> ### I’m looking for a simple explanation of what enumerability will be, >> going forward. If there isn’t one then I’d argue that no new feature should >> be influenced by it. > > That was one of the argument made in favor of concise methods defaulting as > not enumerable: enumerable really only controls whether a property shows up > in for-in (and a couple closely related reflection functions) and for-in has > been essentially deprecated and replace by for-of. That makes the enumerable > attribute an obsolete feature and we should be trying to give it meaning for > new features. Hence, just always default it to true.
Good point. That “meaning for new features” should probably be clearly stated and dictate how `Object.assign()` behaves. I know this runs counter the conventional wisdom for specs, but I find design rationales incredibly important for making sense of what’s going on: The answers and discussions on this mailing list were essential in helping me understand the language. Axel -- 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
