Look Ma, no "this" (was: ECMAScript Harmony)

Kris Zyp kris at sitepen.com
Mon Aug 25 06:39:47 PDT 2008


>> I am surprised this is up for debate, I would also think that we  would 
>> want
>> instance-private by default.
>
> We can debate lots of things, some that might actually be in play.  AFAIK 
> this one is not decided in the committee (it's way too early),  but IP 
> does have some strong proponents.
>
> AS3, JScript.NET, and Waldemar's original ES4/JS2 work all had CP.  Java 
> has CP. So do C++ and C#. It should not come as a surprise,  therefore, if 
> CP has at least to be dealt with by some rationale for  IP over against 
> CP. "Smalltalk rules" won't cut it ;-).
>
> I'm happy to have a little debate on this topic, given the different 
> precedents. I'm wondering why you think there's no question.
>
> /be

I'm sorry, I had misunderstood. I was thinking CP meant one variable per 
class (like indicated by "static"), but CP means the scope of who could 
access the private object property. This is a question worthy of debate.
Thanks,
Kris



More information about the Es-discuss mailing list