Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Alias allKeys to keysIn #2071

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jridgewell
Copy link
Collaborator

I’m only mad because it wasn’t discussed. And, I think _.keysIn is a better name, in part because of your own argument.

Re: #2061, 4f771e0

@jashkenas
Copy link
Owner

No — let's leave this be. ownKeys would have been preferable, but that's already what keys is. Hence allKeys.

keys vs. keysIn — you have to memorize which is which.

@megawac
Copy link
Collaborator

megawac commented Feb 20, 2015

allKeys is inconsistent with the rest of the library. At least keysIn aligns with native for..in and other *Own methods

I’m only mad because it wasn’t discussed. And, I think `_.keysIn` is a
better name, in part because of your [own
argument](jashkenas@4f771e0a04e8b07
1b4857e8e8da13fcb79c5c0d5#commitcomment-9833268).
@jridgewell jridgewell changed the title KeysIn allKeys Alias allKeys to keysIn Feb 20, 2015
@jridgewell
Copy link
Collaborator Author

But you just released _.extendOwn?

For the record, I'm 👎 on the change. I've updated to just alias _.allKeys to _.keysIn.

@jamiebuilds
Copy link
Contributor

_.allKeys is pretty ambiguous IMO, _.keysIn makes sense as it's a for..in loop that fixes IE issues.

@raghumadhavan
Copy link

@jridgewell Issue seems to be open from a long time, could you consider closing it.

@jgonggrijp
Copy link
Collaborator

I'm sorry to meddle in other people's old sores, but I'm just closing this.

@jgonggrijp jgonggrijp closed this May 9, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants