I never hold on on polyfills, I already use Object.mixin in redefine.js and other personal code ;-)
I think the direction is that second argument to N extra is an old pattern TC39 won't lie for any new API On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Dmitry Soshnikov < dmitry.soshni...@gmail.com> wrote: > Please hold on with pollyfilling, until we realize this is something is > really required and can be useful. If it's not, this should be changed to > multiple arguments. Since this "potential" map is not even in current > draft, I believe Rick refers to something that was never taken as a real > thing to apply. > > Dmitry > > > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Andrea Giammarchi < > andrea.giammar...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I think `[mixin1, mixin2, mixin3].reduce(Object.mixin, source);` is a >> win, only thing I am not sure, is how this third argument could make into >> this approach (if reusable, I didn't even know about this extra arg) >> >> Any hint on the extra arg appreciated for polyfill purpose, thanks >> >> >> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Dmitry Soshnikov < >> dmitry.soshni...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Dmitry Soshnikov < >>>> dmitry.soshni...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> It's very likely it was (should have been I believe) discussed before, >>>>> and even probably was approved, but I don't see it in the latest draft >>>>> yet. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The following has been discussed, but... >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Just to make sure, the signature of the "assign" and "mixin" method >>>>> should be: >>>>> >>>>> Object.assign(target, source,[source2, ..., sourceN]); >>>>> Object.mixin(target, source,[source2, ..., sourceN]); >>>>> >>>>> Current draft shows me only one source for both the methods. >>>>> >>>> >>>> That's correct. The third argument is being reserved for a descriptor >>>> map (potentially). Object.assign is not specified to match the _exact_ >>>> behaviour of any existing object "merge", "extend", "mixin" operation. >>>> >>>> >>> OK, good to know. Can you show a practical example with this (potential) >>> descriptor map argument? Just wanna make sure it's really more useful than >>> accepting multiple sources. >>> >>> >>>> This is not unreasonable: >>>> >>>> function merge(target, ...sources) { >>>> return sources.reduce(Object.assign, target); >>>> } >>>> >>> >>> Sure. The question is not that we can write own abstraction on top of >>> existing behavior, the question is having it out of the box. Unless the >>> descriptor map you mention really worth it. >>> >>> Dmitry >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> es-discuss mailing list >>> es-discuss@mozilla.org >>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss