`String.prototype.symbolAt()` (improved `String.prototype.charAt()`)
Benjamin (Inglor) Gruenbaum
inglor at gmail.com
Fri Oct 18 08:10:24 PDT 2013
I also noticed the naming similarity to ES6 `Symbol`s.
I've seen people fill `String.prototype.getFullChar` before and similarly
things like `String.prototype.fromFullCharCode` for dealing with surrogates
before. I like `String.prototype.signAt` but I haven't seen it used before.
I'm eager to hear what Allen has to say about this given his work on
unicode in ecmascript. Especially how it settles with this
I also think that this is important enough to be there.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mathias Bynens <mathias at qiwi.be>
To: Rick Waldron <waldron.rick at gmail.com>
Cc: "es-discuss at mozilla.org list" <es-discuss at mozilla.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 09:47:21 -0500
Subject: Re: `String.prototype.symbolAt()` (improved
On 18 Oct 2013, at 09:21, Rick Waldron <waldron.rick at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the idea is good, but the name may be confusing with regard to
Symbols (maybe not?)
Yeah, I thought about that, but couldn’t figure out a better name. “Glyph”
or “Grapheme” wouldn’t be accurate. Any suggestions?
Anyway, if everyone agrees this is a good idea I’ll get started on fleshing
out a proposal. We can then use this thread to bikeshed about the name.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss