On 3/10/15, Edwin Reynoso <eor...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Edwin -
> Well the current ES6 `.includes()` was before named `.contains()`: > [String.prototype.includes] ( > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/String/includes#String.prototype.contains > ) > > But if Garrett Smith was trying to point out that `.contains()` would be > better naming for the specific purpose of using an Array: > `str.contains(["Mary", "Bob"])` then ok? maybe. > str.contains was Andrea's interpretation of my example. Nevermind that; let me try again... You first asked about making String.prototype.includes take an array, check every item in the array, and return false if any array item is not present in the string, else return true. From that, you switched it around to array.every, to make sure every item was in the string. names.every(name => str.includes(name)); So far so good... That's essentially what Array.prototype.containsAll would do. Array.prototype.containsAll(anotherArray) You can split the string to get anotherArray. names.every(str.split(/,\s*/)); I cannot explain what ES6 @@split does. The spec have gotten even farther away from how web developers understand the language. The ECMAScript specification has always been complicated by internal specification mechanisms, and it was because of this obfuscation that I was able to have a bit of an edge on others. I was able to understand the difference between the confusingly same-named [[Prototype]] (an object's internal property) and fn.prototype (the property that every user-defined function gets by default), and that there implies that each user-defined function has both a [[Prototype]] (being Function.prototype) and a .prototype property. It's confusing, but I got it. The new stuff in the spec, where there is not even String.prototype.split, but @@split is hard to understand. The ECMAScript 3 spec was already too hard for most developers. Things like missing RegularExpressionLiteral, the ActivationObject/VariableObject (which one is it?), PrimitiveValue being a number for Date objects, but where addition calls ToPrimitive with hint "string", and that gets passed to DefaultValue. It's hard. We need to work for the tech companies that steal your data and provide useless junk to the user. Call us rockstars or other insulting titles, but at the end of the day, I need to to is memorize those specs if I want to understand what I am doing in order to pay my rent. It can and should suck less. ECMAScript 5 added complexity. ECMAScript 6's explanations and specification terminology seems too much for me. The spec shouldn't be so hard that programmers can't understand it. A good spec should serve as a reference for developers to go and look up how it works. I can't say how I'd write it better because I haven't taken the time to grok it all. Nor do I plan to - life is too short. -- Garrett @xkit ChordCycles.com garretts.github.io personx.tumblr.com _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
