Closed zloirock closed 2 weeks ago
it should probably be more like Call(callbackfn, *undefined*, << key >>)
+1 for Call(callbackfn, *undefined*, << key >>)
. I think it would be more natural to receive the key as an argument instead of as the receiver.
In the README polyfill example, it's just
callbackFunction()
. In the spec draft, it'sCall(callbackfn, key)
(something likecallbackfn.call(key)
) - that, for example, cause issues with arrow callbacks.Should it be something like
callbackFunction(key)
?