(Map|Set|WeakMap)#set() returns `this` ?
waldron.rick at gmail.com
Tue Dec 4 12:23:19 PST 2012
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Andrea Giammarchi <
andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com> wrote:
> it would be nice to add a #put(key, value) that returns value and see what
> developers prefer on daily basis tasks :-)
> anyway, if it won't change, it's OK, I had my answer, thanks
I like surveying actual developer-users like this, despite the committee's
aversion to "design-by-survey". I sent out a survey 2 weeks ago and
received 381 responses, 256 for return-this and 125 for return something
else (undefined, the new length or size, the value). If the results had
been different, I would've removed the item from the agenda entirely, but
they are as I expected them to be and I feel compelled to take that into
consideration. This survey was not mentioned as a part of my proposal and
therefore had no influence on the decision made by the committee.
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.rick at gmail.com>wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Andrea Giammarchi <
>> andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> for develoeprs I meant jQuery users too, being one of th emost popular
>>> API out there.
>>> What I meant with jQuery#add method is that last thing added is the one
>>> returned, it does nto return the initial object, it returns the new result
>>> out of a merge but this is not the initial this, this is a new thing with
>>> latest added thing in.
>> That is exactly what I described—the case for returning a fresh jQuery
>> object exists to support end() (http://api.jquery.com/end/) which allows
>> you to chain operations (eg. filter->apply css or something) and restore
>> the original jQuery object (matching set of elements) by keeping a
>> reference to that object stored as a property of the new jQuery object.
>> This mechanism is irrelevant in the comparison of Set API semantics.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss