mightyiampresence at gmail.com
Tue Jun 14 19:06:10 UTC 2016
> What's the point of using `reduce` instead of `every`?
Of course. Updated to use `.every`.
I disagree with this test
> expect([2, 3].includesAll()).toBe(false)
> The array `[2,3]` includes all items in ``. So it should return `true`.
There are no items in `` so that doesn't seem like a true statement to
However, one could argue both ways. So I look at `.includes`:
.includes() // false
includes() // false
// and so on...
So, at least consistency pulls towards `false`.
> It'd be nicer if it took an array, rather than being variadic. That also
preserves the ability to add extra arguments in the future.
I see the point. Updated to use a single array argument.
Here it is: http://codepen.io/mightyiam/pen/PzNLKr/?editors=0012
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss