3 ms·

Yeah, it seems like kind of an odd choice to introduce a whole new type and extend the kind of values that can index an object, when extending object indexing a

by bcoates 11y ago

Yeah, it seems like kind of an odd choice to introduce a whole new type and extend the kind of values that can index an object, when extending object indexing alone would do everything symbols do anyway.

quarterto 11y ago
It's actually not extending object indexing. From the object's point of view, the symbol is just another (albeit opaque) string.
- bcoates 11y ago
  There's still some magic involving the symbol properties being automatically non-enumerable, right?