4 ms·

Here's the other thing that neither of the other commenters mentioned: You can't go around peppering your code with use of this new syntax if you want it to co

Here's the other thing that neither of the other commenters mentioned: You can't go around peppering your code with use of this new syntax if you want it to continue working on older runtimes. With `Symbol`, you can at least create a polyfill that approximates what it's shooting for. > declaring a Symbol Don't think of it as "declaring a symbol" (because it isn't). Think of it as generating a symbol (because it is).

hajile 11y ago
ES6 already adds a ton of new constructs that won't run on older browsers. Relying on symbols to be interned also won't work on older machines. A symbol-literal syntax like #symbol and #"spaced symbol" would make them far easier to use and increase their adoption. Who really wants to write map.add(new Symbol("foo"), 'bar') instead of map.add(#foo, 'bar')?
- ajuc 11y ago
  > Who really wants to write map.add(new Symbol("foo"), 'bar') instead of map.add(#foo, 'bar')? It makes it clear when you are generating new symbol, and when you are reusing existing symbol. var a = new Symbol("foo"); var b = new Symbol("foo"); map[a]="firstValue"; map[b]="secondValue"; Console.log(map[a] + " " + map[b]); // writes "firstValue secondValue" How does it work with your syntax? map[#foo]="firstValue"; map[#foo]="secondValue"; Console.log(map[#foo]); // what is written here?
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- masklinn 11y ago
  > Who really wants to write map.add(new Symbol("foo"), 'bar') Nobody because it's completely daft, and absolutely not equivalent to the second version, the equivalent to the second version is: map.add("foo", "bar")