/cc @theclapp @myitcv

Summary: I like type Callable and func NewCallable.

This is a surprisingly difficult issue to nail down. Lots of things are in play: Ease of usage of documentation, point of view, being accurate, and being succinct, to name a few.

• I agree that the many places the word "function" is used would make NewFunction problematic.
• If I throw out my desire for succinctness, I like NewCallableFromJS, which is accurate but a mouthful.
• From the point of view of JavaScript, a Go function is "foreign" or "external", so NewForeign or NewExtern kind of strike my fancy. But obviously we're writing Go and will tend to look at things from the Go point of view, so I also like NewNative or NewNativeFunc. But a new native function in Go is of course normally just func ..., so I don't like any of these four enough to actually advocate.

All of that leads me to prefer Callable as the type and NewCallable as the constructor.

I like Callable as well. My only concern is that the "-able" suffix is typically used for interfaces in many languages. I'm not sure how I feel about Native/NativeFunc. I liked JSFunc in my head, until I realized that the external notation would be js.JSFunc, which isn't ideal.

I like Callable though. And it's definitely better than Callback.

I'm not great when it comes to naming things 😄

• Callback is too specific to my mind to one particular use case for such values
• Function will, as you say, clash/look too similar to "function"
• Similarly, Func (memories of GopherJS's MakeFunc) will clash/look too similar to func
• WrappedFunc is the closest as far as naming what such a value actually represents, but is perhaps a bit cumbersome

cc @bradfitz for some better name ideas

@myitcv So you don't like Callable either?

@theclapp

So you don't like Callable either?

I prefer WrappedFunc. Because then you could have:

func Wrap(func(this Value, args []Value) interface{}) WrappedFunc

which would then be used as js.Wrap(...)

func Wrap(func(this Value, args []Value) interface{}) WrappedFunc

Ohh, I like this

What does js.Wrap wrap? A value? A function? It should at least be js.WrapFunc, but this is still a bit inconsistent with js.ValueOf and js.TypedArrayOf.

But this got me thinking: The problem around js.Function isn't as bad if you call it wrapped function in the documentation. Here's a draft:

// FunctionOf returns a wrapped function.
//
// Invoking the JavaScript function will synchronously call the Go function fn with the value of JavaScript's
// "this" keyword and the arguments of the invocation.
// The return value of the invocation is the result of the Go function mapped back to JavaScript according to ValueOf.
//
// A wrapped function triggered during a call from Go to JavaScript gets executed on the same goroutine.
// A wrapped function triggered by JavaScript's event loop gets executed on an extra goroutine.
// Blocking operations in the wrapped function will block the event loop.
// As a consequence, if one wrapped function blocks, other wrapped functions will not be processed.
// A blocking function should therefore explicitly start a new goroutine.
//
// Function.Release must be called to free up resources when the function will not be used any more.

So maybe we can have js.Function and js.FunctionOf?

Change https://golang.org/cl/153559 mentions this issue: syscall/js: rename js.Callback to js.Function

Change https://golang.org/cl/154059 mentions this issue: doc/go1.12: add note about CL 153559's syscall/js.Callback rename