ES Discuss - Message History

Rick Waldron (2013-09-26T22:13:27.000Z)

Go to Source

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:
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-September/033720.html

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:
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-September/033725.html

Rick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130926/7d01d18a/attachment.html>

domenic at domenicdenicola.com (2013-10-13T02:28:50.374Z)

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:
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-September/033720.html

> 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:
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-September/033725.html

Edit