typeof symbol (Was: Sept 19 TC39 Meeting Notes)
rossberg at google.com
Mon Oct 1 05:26:22 PDT 2012
On 30 September 2012 00:08, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org> wrote:
> I think this is too philosophical a discussion to result in a strong reason
> to risk "symbol". Just my gut-check. Other TC39ers should weigh in (Andreas
> R. especially).
Type "symbol" would be my preference, but it is difficult to estimate
(for me) whether that involves a risk.
However, this clearly is an issue beyond symbols alone. The same
problem re-arises whenever we have to add new primitive types in the
future. It doesn't seem like a sustainable strategy to fake any new
type ever into an object. Perhaps it is less harmful on the long run
if we took the chance to clarify _now_ that the set of strings
returned by 'typeof' is not fixed, and should not be treated as such?
More information about the es-discuss