@@iterator in arguments object

Brendan Eich brendan at mozilla.com
Sun Dec 23 09:38:48 PST 2012


Brandon Benvie wrote:
>  You're right, defaults would take care of those few places reducing 
> the need to reference the arguments object entirely. I think there may 
> be one or two exceptions, like when there's no default value but an 
> explicit `undefined` is coerced to "undefined" but a lack of the 
> argument becomes an empty string. I guessable default value of the 
> empty string may cover this but I have a nagging feeling there's some 
> exception in one of the builtin methods that defies all attempts that 
> don't rely on arguments.length, but I can't figure out what that 
> method might be.

If it exists, it's just bad precedent.

You could always use an explicit rest parameter as the only formal 
parameter and still dispense with arguments in new code. So let's say 
s/could/should/.

/be


More information about the es-discuss mailing list