"Syntax for Efficient Traits" is now ready for discussion (was: Classes as Sugar is...)
oliver at apple.com
Mon Sep 13 17:18:36 PDT 2010
On Sep 13, 2010, at 2:02 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Dmitry A. Soshnikov <dmitry.soshnikov at gmail.com> wrote:
> I didn't finished a detailed reading yet, but from the brief scanning, syntactically, I think => and trait class are not needed.
> * I used "trait class" rather than "trait" for two reasons:
> 1) Syntactic ambiguity fear. "trait" is not one of the identifiers reserved by ES5 or ES5/strict, and so I am not proposing that it be an ES-Harmony keyword.
> 2) More importantly, the object binds to the name it declares is not a trait but a function for making traits.
I'd prefer 'class trait' which i think reads better, but i'm not sure how much i'm biased due to my desire to retain LL(1)-ness (I know that there is _some_ bias at least)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss