Classes as Sugar is now ready for discussion

P T Withington ptw at pobox.com
Wed Sep 8 10:16:54 PDT 2010


On 2010-09-05, at 10:33, Mark S. Miller wrote:

> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:classes_as_sugar
> 
> Of the three straw contenders for this niche, my preference order continues
> to be
> * Traits

If I had a vote, it would be +1

> * Classes as Sugar
> * Enhanced Object Literals
> 
> But since Traits seems to be blocked from advancing,

Is there someplace I should read to understand why Traits cannot advance?

> I have now finally put
> the Classes as Sugar strawman on the agenda for consideration by the
> committee. It is now ready for discussion.

This:

> Inheritance using the prototype chain does not work since the members are added to the instance and not the prototype. This makes this proposal non compatible with existing JavaScript paradigms. This in turn leads to classes becoming something completely new that exists on the side of existing best practices of doing OOP in JS.

seems damning, without further explanation.  Enough so that I would say the proposal should not use the word "class" to describe what it does.  From a users point of view, it is baffling why you would want to standardize something so non-standard, when there is a clear call from use cases for a standard for doing "normal" OOP in Javascript.


More information about the es-discuss mailing list