On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Keean Schupke <ke...@fry-it.com> wrote:
>> would:
>> withNamedStorage('x', function(store) {...});
>> make more sense from a naming point of view?
>
> I have a different association for 'with', especially in context of
> JavaScript, so I prefer 'get'. But others feel free to express an
> opinion.In the context of other languages with similar constructs (request a resource which is available within the body of the construct), the "with[resource]" naming scheme is pretty common and well-known. I personally like it. ~TJ
