Classes as Sugar is now ready for discussion

Tom Van Cutsem at
Thu Sep 9 03:13:44 PDT 2010

There's no mistake that dedicated syntax for traits would help users and
implementors alike. However, while I (or others) could definitely come up
with a 'traits-as-sugar', or even a 'traits-as-a-new-value' proposal, that
still wouldn't solve the version evolution problem associated with trait
composition (or any other traditional inheritance mechanism). As long as
this remains a deal-breaker, I don't think it's worth looking into
alternative traits proposals.

As Dave said, traits.js is out there for people to experiment with. Any
feedback on usability issues of the design in its current form are highly

2010/9/9 David Herman <dherman at>

> > Agreed; perhaps my question was not clear. If there was a Traits-like
> > proposal that did include new syntax, would you be against it because
> > you can implement something similar as a library without needing new
> > semantics, or would you be more inclined to reserve judgement until
> > you could actually review a proposal and see what the proposed
> > benefits were?
> The latter (speaking for myself, of course).
> Dave
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list