Yup. Consider const foo = x();
where x happens to have the original value of Symbol. Or const foo = Symbol() where Symbol is not bound to the original value of Symbol. On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Jordan Harband <[email protected]> wrote: > One difference is that functions are syntax - I don't believe `var foo = > new Function();` will have a "name" property inferred. Because `Symbol` is > an identifier that has to be looked up on the global object, might there be > difficulty inferring what the name should be? > > Hopefully someone with more knowledge on the subject will confirm or > correct my belief and my question :-) > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Axel Rauschmayer <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I love how ES6 automatically gives anonymous function definitions names >> (via the variables they are assigned to etc.). Wouldn’t the same make sense >> for symbols? >> >> Hypothetical example: >> >> ```js >> const foo = Symbol(); >> console.log(Symbol('foo').toString()); // Symbol(foo) >> ``` >> >> -- >> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer >> [email protected] >> rauschma.de >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
