4 ms·

JavaScript Symbol.thenable Proposal

• tantalor 8y ago
  If this property would override default behavior, then it should be set to true, not false, i.e., not_thenable=true instead of thenable=false.
  • wilg 8y ago
    Not sure I buy that. Seems like avoiding the double negative is worthwhile. Not all default values need to be false, do they?
    • voldemort1968 8y ago
      Agreed. It's a bad UX convention even; such as error alerts reading "Are you sure you want to not save the document? [YES] [NO]"
    • optimuspaul 8y ago
      If you consider that not setting it results in undefined which would evaluate to false then they are correct. But I don't think that needs to be the case. In reality you can default to whatever you want in which case I agree with you.
• saagarjha 8y ago
  Will this thing really be called "thenable"? Has nobody suggested a better name?
  • snek 8y ago
    The well known name of this behaviour is "thenable" and i think it's best to stick with well-known.
  • x1798DE 8y ago
    My first thought was, "What's a nable?" Then I figured it must be "then-able", but even after that I still accidentally read it as "th enable" as well. Weird, weird name.
• twiss 8y ago
  This would also solve the case of objects that pretend to have every property as a function, e.g.: https://github.com/slmgc/Nothing https://github.com/slmgc/Nothing
• JBReefer 8y ago
  But why?
• vec 8y ago
  Can we not introduce a dirty hack into the formal specification solely to work around an edge case introduced by another dirty hack that's already in the formal specification?