I think it can be useful for functional programming. Since .at() is already a function it can be passed around where callbacks are expected, where as using standard [] needs to at least be wrapped into an arrow function. I think this usage would still be pretty rare though!
I think it can be useful for functional programming. Since
.at()is already a function it can be passed around where callbacks are expected, where as using standard[]needs to at least be wrapped into an arrow function. I think this usage would still be pretty rare though!I didn't even think about that. It's a good example but still an edge case.