The name of a method whose key is a symbol
# Andrea Giammarchi (10 years ago)
being a function name I rather wonder if it wouldn't be better to have
'description' without square brackets ... to be consistent with the fact
the Symbol has no name.
If that's instead a way specified as such in order to understand that is a Symbol then I agree, for consistency, it should have square brackets (which unfortunately when empty remind me an array)
This is the behavior defined in the spec:
const key1 = Symbol('description'); const key2 = Symbol(); let obj = { [key1]() {}, [key2]() {}, }; console.log(obj[key1].name); // '[description]' console.log(obj[key2].name); // ''I’m wondering: if a symbol has no description, wouldn’t it be better to give the method the name
'[]'instead of the empty string?This is the behavior defined in the spec: ```js const key1 = Symbol('description'); const key2 = Symbol(); let obj = { [key1]() {}, [key2]() {}, }; console.log(obj[key1].name); // '[description]' console.log(obj[key2].name); // '' ``` I’m wondering: if a symbol has no description, wouldn’t it be better to give the method the name `'[]'` instead of the empty string? -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer axel at rauschma.de <mailto:axel at rauschma.de> rauschma.de -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150910/e81c1f36/attachment.html>