Comments on Sept Meeting Notes
waldron.rick at gmail.com
Thu Sep 26 15:39:03 PDT 2013
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>wrote:
> On Sep 26, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Rick Waldron wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Erik Arvidsson <erik.arvidsson at gmail.com>wrote:
>> No surprise here, but I also support using "@" methods.
> I don't. Please see my response to Kevin Smith:
> I'm also in
>> favor of making methods non enumerable by default. This makes them
>> more consistent with what we have in ES today.
> That might be the case for methods defined on prototypes of built-in
> objects, but it's absolutely not the case for user land code. Please see
> the examples in my previous response to Allen:
> so name your events property "@RickWaldron at events".
> If somebody subclasses Emitter and know that property name, then they must
> be doing something intentional.
> Unique Symbols don't guarantee that sort of integrity. All you've
> accomplish by using them as in your example is to minimize that chance that
> somebody else doesn't accidentally use the same property name for some
> other purpose. Naming your property "@RickWaldron at events" also makes
> such accidentally unlikely.
The Symbol isn't exposed so therefore can't accidentally be used to
accidentally pave over the subclass instance object's events cache. As far
as the "@RickWaldron at events" Hungarian notation monstrosity is concerned:
the first thing I thought when I saw this was that it would never pass any
practitioner's peer code review. This is worse then implied
collision-safety (or privacy, HA!) of "_"-prefixed properties—worse because
the language is saying "go ahead and do this".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss