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
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
