Actually I disagree with you. `Class` will not be confusing, since as you said, people probably will use `toStringTag` once per `class`. So `classTag` just becomes a better name. String, Boolean, etc, are just names of classes.
From: [email protected] Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 09:55:01 -0800 Subject: Re: Property names for public symbols To: [email protected] CC: [email protected]; [email protected] "[[Class]]" was the pre-ES6 term to refer to this value, but with the ES6 "class" keyword that would be confusing, and I don't think it would be a good idea to conflate the meaning of the term even further. "toString" is a common single idiom in JS since it's the function that String() invokes, so "toStringTag" works for me. This particular value is one that, imo, in practice should be rarely used (once per "class" perhaps, in its definition), so I'm not hugely concerned about the naming (my concerns were about the behavior). My guess would be that in order to effect a change at this very late date, one would have to propose a name that was so compelling as to make it an obvious choice. On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 7:16 AM, Gary Guo <[email protected]> wrote: How about "classTag" instead of "toStringTag", which makes it sound like a noun.
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
