guest271314, what is you point against `nameof` feature?
If you don't like it - don't use it. Why prohibit this feature for
those who find it beneficial?
I see `nameof` beneficial in following cases
Case 1. Function guard.
```
function func1(options) {
...
if (options.userName == undefined) {
Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 9:48 PM Stas Berkov wrote:
> Less fragile. Less mess. You can rename field/property without fear you
> break something (using IDE refactoring tools).
> With high probablity you will break something when you refactor and have
> fields hardcoded as strings.
> Someo
You get more robust code.
>
> How is "robust" objectively determined?
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 5:21 PM Stas Berkov wrote:
>
>> ES can befit from `nameof` feature the same way as TS. There is no TS
>> specific in it.
>> It was ask
uages, most of the use cases don't apply to dynamic
> Javascript
> The only legit use case I can think of is helping refactor tools to
> rename properties (but even mismatch errors between strings and
> properties names can be caught in compile time using modern
> Typescript)
Can we revisit this issue?
In C# there is `nameof`, in Swift you can do the same by calling
```
let keyPath = \Person.mother.firstName
NSPredicate(format: "%K == %@", keyPath, "Andrew")
```
Let's introduce `nameof` in ES, please.
Devs from TypeScript don't want to introduce this feature in
5 matches
Mail list logo