Public/private namespaces in harmony classes proposal
Mark S. Miller
erights at google.com
Thu Jul 7 21:49:57 PDT 2011
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Gavin Barraclough <barraclough at apple.com>wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> In the harmony classes proposal,
> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:classes , I'm interested in
> understanding the following issue:
> One or two namespaces for public properties and private instance
> variables [RESOLVED two, Mark’s argument]
> Do you remember if this argument was made in email, and if so would anyone
> happen to know where to look to find this (I've tried a little googling to
> no avail!), I'd be interested in understanding the rationale behind this
I don't think it was made in before in email. Here goes:
For non-const classes, their instances are extensible by default. Even if
you disagree with this default, I think we generally agree that there should
at least be an option to make extensible instances.
Say public and private share one namespace. Say extensible instance X has
private instance property 'foo'. Say a client of X tries to extend it with a
public 'foo' property. What happens?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss