domenic at domenicdenicola.com (2013-10-26T03:21:42.549Z)
Rick Waldron wrote:
> If this were how it was defined, I would say get rid of it and
> practitioners will carry on using their own non-nanny implementations.
> If it can't invoke setters then it loses properties like innerHTML.
>
> eg.
>
> ```js
> Object.assign(div, {
> innerHTML: `${name}<BR>`,
> id: "an-id",
> dataset: {
> foo: 1,
> bar: 2
> }
> });
> ```
>
I see. I wasn't clear on the use-case for `Object.assign`. You're right; this makes sense.
Given this use for `Object.assign`, integrity probably isn't a concern for these cases. A lot of the times, you'll know where the data's coming from, and if you don't you can filter it. Looks like a nice short-hand (though I'm still somewhat hoping for monocle-mustache in a later edition!) I was thinking of it too much as a cousin to `Object.mixin`, which is great for meta-programming and building abstractions. `Object.assign` seems more geared toward being a nice little helper function.
Rick Waldron wrote: > If this were how it was defined, I would say get rid of it and > practitioners will carry on using their own non-nanny implementations. > If it can't invoke setters then it loses properties like innerHTML. > > eg. > > Object.assign(div, { > innerHTML: `${name}<BR>`, > id: "an-id", > dataset: { > foo: 1, > bar: 2 > } > }); > > I see. I wasn't clear on the use-case for `Object.assign`. You're right; this makes sense. Given this use for `Object.assign`, integrity probably isn't a concern for these cases. A lot of the times, you'll know where the data's coming from, and if you don't you can filter it. Looks like a nice short-hand (though I'm still somewhat hoping for monocle-mustache in a later edition!) I was thinking of it too much as a cousin to `Object.mixin`, which is great for meta-programming and building abstractions. `Object.assign` seems more geared toward being a nice little helper function. Cool, Nathan