True, it's a fairly trivial thing, but so is `Array.prototype.includes`. I can give a hundred other examples.
There is a reason that so many people use underscore, ramda, lodash, etc: the "standard library" in Javascript is incomplete. We should aim to provide as many of these helpful utilities as possible. Not only does it improve developer experience, it also reduces payloads people need to download over the wire. I can understand why people are hesitant to add _syntactic additions_ to JavaScript, but when it comes to such useful cases that are already in wide use via libraries, I can't understand the reservations. You did provide a good method name (`guard`) if the final decision is to avoid overloading `catch` (which I don't mind either way, in some ways it would be preferable so the argument order could be reversed). Anyways, I think the best implementation would do three things: 1. If `matcher` is a function, check if `matcher.prototype instanceof Error`, if so, use `instanceof` to check if a rejected error matches 2. If `matcher` is a function that doesn't inherit from `Error`, execute it with the rejected error to get the match condition 3. If `matcher` is an object, check every own enumerable property against the rejected error to get the match condition This seems pretty complicated, in that it doesn't seem to match the principle of avoiding overloading in the standard library. I think in this case, removing any of this functionality is a significant loss, but if any were to be removed, I'd choose #3. Regards, Peter
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
