> > What's the point of using `reduce` instead of `every`? > Of course. Updated to use `.every`.
I disagree with this test > > ```js > expect([2, 3].includesAll()).toBe(false) > ``` > > The array `[2,3]` includes all items in `[]`. So it should return `true`. > There are no items in `[]` so that doesn't seem like a true statement to me. However, one could argue both ways. So I look at `.includes`: ```js [].includes() // false [1]includes() // false // and so on... ``` So, at least consistency pulls towards `false`. > It'd be nicer if it took an array, rather than being variadic. That also preserves the ability to add extra arguments in the future. I see the point. Updated to use a single array argument. --- Here it is: http://codepen.io/mightyiam/pen/PzNLKr/?editors=0012
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
