If that's the argument, then Array.prototype.contains should accept another Array, not an element to check.
> On Mar 7, 2014, at 5:49, "medikoo" <medikoo+mozilla....@medikoo.com> wrote: > > Domenic Denicola-2 wrote >> Personally I think the more useful model to follow than >> `String.prototype.contains` is `Set.prototype.has`. > > API wise, arrays have much more in common with strings than with sets. > > Thinking ES5, they're both array-likes, set isn't. They share `length` > property, their values can be accessed through indexes arr[0], str[0], they > share few method names (`indexOf`, `lastIndexOf`), and all non destructive > array methods can be successfully executed on strings, while they won't work > with sets. > > I think it would be more appropriate to stick with `arr.contains` especially > that we already have `arr.indexOf` and `str.indexOf`, and both `indexOf` and > `contains` share same signature. > > `arr.has` could be fine, if we also rename `str.contains` to `str.has`. > > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://mozilla.6506.n7.nabble.com/Array-prototype-contains-tp309926p310234.html > Sent from the Mozilla - ECMAScript 4 discussion mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > 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
