Re: [whatwg/streams] What should we call ReadableByteStream.prototype.getBYOBReader()? (#294)

Hmm. I still like keeping BYOB in those names, because BYOB is the new capability on top of the default. I think it would be OK to keep it. I think of the `byob: true` option to the underlying source to be something like `byobCapable: true` (just shorter). I agree that its essential characteristic is that it handles bytes, but it's main new capability is a BYOB API.

Among byob, buffer-fed, and buffer-provided I think byob is pretty good. Maybe it is just because we have been staring at that for a few months though. I think buffer-fed is better than buffer-provided probably.

---
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/streams/issues/294#issuecomment-203145751