To an extent, I agree… but how would you write a function like jQuery.ajax, which takes upwards of 30 optional parameters, in a more JavaScripty way?
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jason Mulligan <[email protected]> wrote: > Considering the language, sending an object of args is going against > the convention of JavaScript due to laziness. > > On Jun 17, 12:26 pm, Nick Morgan <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 17 June 2011 16:32, Jason Mulligan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I prefer sending individual parameters. It's a cross-language > > > convention that works and is expected. > > > > I think doing stuff in one language because it's what you do in other > > languages is a really bad idea - you should be coding with the idioms > > of your current language. > > > > -- > > Nick Morganhttp://skilldrick.co.uk > > @skilldrick > > -- > To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > -- To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
