On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 4:28 PM, John Lenz <[email protected]> wrote: > I understand the way it is used, but I don't understand why. "for-of" > could have been spec'd to take either an Iterable (an object with an > [Symbol.iterator] method) or an Iterator. Or just an Iterable.
Not just for-of, but the whole rest of the world (in particular, anything that directly consumes iterables) would also have to make that distinction. Much easier to just let everyone pretend that an iterator is iterable, so you can use a common API between the two types. (Also, Python already worked this way, and a lot of JS iterator details were copied from Python originally.) ~TJ _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
