- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 19:52:55 +0200
- To: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
- Cc: James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>, WHATWG <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 7:15 PM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote: > I still think that calling it bodyStream actually helps understanding > all you need and it's short/portable... > > response.bodyStream.asJSON() > > seems to at least give the hint that it is a stream that is consumed > without getting too crazy. Well 1), response.json() is short too, much shorter in fact. 2) We have no idea what the design of what bodyStream's getter returns is or should be. 3) As already indicated, after you use this once, you realize how it works. 4) I don't see how yours is more portable than James' proposal. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 22 August 2014 17:53:21 UTC