set.delete method name
Brendan Eich
brendan at mozilla.org
Tue Feb 28 22:08:13 PST 2012
Mark S. Miller wrote:
> I appreciate the feedback, but I do not understand the rationale. Is
> it just to avoid needing to say
>
> map['delete'](key)
>
> when supporting old browsers without an ES5->ES3 translation step?
Yes. Isn't that enough friction? I think so based on long-standing pain
that led us to unreserve keywords after dot.
I'm still open to remove because it's a better antonym to add. I do not
think the base-level operator names (where they exist) must be re-used.
But I may be missing a fine point here for why you prefer 'delete'?
/be
> If there is no other downside, I'm inclined to stick with "delete".
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Adam Shannon <adam at ashannon.us
> <mailto:adam at ashannon.us>> wrote:
>
> I agree that it should be named "remove" rather than delete.
>
>
> On Tuesday, February 28, 2012, Yehuda Katz wrote:
>
> Just catching up on this discussion. I should point out that
> this problem applies to Map and possibly other collections as
> well.
>
> Speaking as someone who is looking to use these features
> today, I hit this problem immediately. Ember.js already has a
> Map; we can reliably generate a unique id for any object (by
> stashing it on the object; ok for our cases), and have a
> reliable way to generate guids for non-Objects.
>
> Ideally, we'd like to be able to say something like:
> `if(typeof Map !== "undefined") { Ember.Map = Map; }`
> (although we'd probably do more checks because shims in
> general have worse performance characteristics).
>
> Unfortunately, because of the `delete` problem, we cannot do
> this. Because we are unwilling to monkey-patch Map directly,
> we will have to create a shim object that delegates to the Map.
>
> I'm sympathetic to the "let's not make choices based on old
> broken browsers", but let's be fair here. The name `remove` is
> perfectly clear. In five years, nobody is going to think twice
> about that API, and web developers won't think twice about it
> today. Using a clear name that also happens not to run afoul
> of older browsers for shim purposes isn't caving to the past:
> it's being pragmatic about helping people adopt a new feature
> with very little cost.
>
> Yehuda Katz
> (ph) 718.877.1325 <tel:718.877.1325>
>
>
>
> --
> Adam Shannon
> Developer
> University of Northern Iowa
> Sophomore -- Computer Science B.S. & Mathematics
> http://ashannon.us
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> --MarkM
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
More information about the es-discuss
mailing list