Closed jridgewell closed 6 years ago
I suspect that would have significant web compat risk; most of the speculative polyfills define last
as a function, not a getter.
Personally I'm not especially fond of last
as a getter, regardless of the web-compat issues. A last getter was floated a while ago (tc39/ecma262#36) and stalled for web-compat issues.
Closing this. The Readme has been updated to reflect the current state of this proposal which features Array.prototype.end
getter/setter.
Instead of defining a getter/setter at
-1
(very scary) or:-1
(which we don’t have precedent for), why not definelast
as a one?