Re: [streams] ReadableStream.getReader name is a bit misleading (#308)

taking something to me means that it's already there, and you're taking it from someone else who has it. That's not really what's going on, or even how it should be conceptualized. I would put takeReader on some class that gets a reader, holds it, but might want to let others have it for a while while it's not using it.

Also my objection to acquire is that it's basically synonymous with "get", at least how I hear the two words used in my life. ("Go acquire me a coffee" is just a more formal/sillier way of saying "go get me a coffee".) It doesn't really imply exclusive access in my experience. So I don't understand @youennf's arguments that "get a reader" feels safe/idempotent whereas "acquire a reader" does not.

I think at one point we called it `getExclusiveReader` which might give the explicitness desired. But I'd rather it be known that all readers are exclusive, so people don't have to type that reminder every time they want a reader.

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/streams/issues/308#issuecomment-88744091