Since `Array.prototype.push` is variadic, I don't see how this would be any improvement on the status quo (which isn't that bad to begin with).
On Wed, May 23, 2018, 13:57 T.J. Crowder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 6:49 PM, Jordi Bunster <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Cool! > > > > So for me, the point would be symmetry with Map and Set. > > Are you saying you'd want to have `append` on them as well? > > > As such my poly would go like so: > > > > ```js > > Object.defineProperty(Array.prototype, "append", { > > writable: true, > > configurable: true, > > value: function(arg) { > > this.push(arg); > > return this; > > } > > }); > > For some reason, in my head you were calling `append` with an array, not > discrete items. Not sure why that was. Silly of me. I've rarely needed an > `append` for individual items, my use cases have generally been appending > an array to another array. But that could be its own separate thing > (`appendArray`). (I **wouldn't** overload it as with `concat`.) > > I'd lean toward accepting as many as are given, as with `push`: > > ```js > Object.defineProperty(Array.prototype, "append", { > value: function(...items) { > for (let i = 0, len = source.length; i < len; ++i) { > this.push(item[i]); > } > return this; > }, > writable: true, > configurable: true > }); > ``` > > -- T.J. Crowder > _______________________________________________ > 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
