Ah, yes and agreed. That was definitely not relayed in the message below-
thanks for the clarification, the context does make a difference.
Rick
On Nov 20, 2011, at 1:40 AM, David Herman <dher...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2011, at 5:50 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
>
>> On Nov 19, 2011, at 2:20 PM, Rick Waldron wrote:
>>
>>> Q. We don't use option parameter like that in JS (see previous point for
>>> actual example)
>>>
>>> Using an object-as-option parameter is a very common API design pattern in
>>> real-world JavaScript today - why anyone would say otherwise is
>>> confounding.
>>
>> Right. For example, ES5's property descriptor and property descriptor map
>> parameters.
>
> It was me. I didn't say JS doesn't use options objects. I said the G11n
> library was using them wrong. They were doing:
>
> if (!ops) {
> ops = { foo: defFoo, bar: defBar, baz: defBaz };
> }
>
> instead of e.g.:
>
> if (!ops)
> ops = {};
> if (typeof ops.foo === "undefined")
> ops.foo = defFoo;
> if (typeof ops.bar === "undefined")
> ops.bar = defBar;
> if (typeof ops.baz === "undefined")
> ops.baz = defBaz;
>
> IOW, it shouldn't be all or nothing, but rather each property of the options
> object is separately optional.
>
> Dave
>
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
