4 ms·
That makes sense. I wonder though if there is a better convention than "self". That by itself (to me at least) does not say much about which "self" we are des
by beernutz 12y ago
That makes sense. I wonder though if there is a better convention than "self". That by itself (to me at least) does not say much about which "self" we are describing. Maybe it is just a matter of personal preference, but I like to be more specific and descriptive.
It reminds me of the practice of using "throw-away" variables in for loops. Personally I would still rather name the variable "loop" instead of "i".
- mdaniel 12y agoOk, you are free to propose an alternative - either here or to your team - but be sure you and your team are prepared to have to adjust if and when you join another JS team. And if I had to name loop variables "loop" I would lose my mind. But I'm glad it works for you and your team, so long as you never have nested for loops.