On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Jeremy Orlow <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Andrei Popescu <[email protected]> wrote: >> Given that open() is one of those functions that are likely to grow in >> parameters over time, I wonder if we should consider taking an object as the >> second argument with names/values(e.g. open("mydatabase", { description: >> "foo" }); ). That would allow us to keep the minimum specification small and >> easily add more parameters later without resulting un hard to read code that >> has a bunch of "undefined" in arguments. >> >> The only thing I'm not sure is if there is precedent of doing this in >> one of the standard APIs. > > That sounds great to me.
Thank god, maybe we can *finally* make this a pattern in the web platform. Javascript's lack of keyword parameters is already a pain; the inexplicable resistance to adding this common hack around that into the web platform has pained me every time. ~TJ
