Public/private namespaces in harmony classes proposal

Juan Ignacio Dopazo dopazo.juan at
Fri Jul 8 08:45:57 PDT 2011

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at> wrote:

> On Jul 8, 2011, at 7:43 AM, Juan Ignacio Dopazo wrote:
> My first thought was: why not just statically replace this.x, with private
> x, with this[xPrivateName] and forget about accessing private properties
> of other objects? That would still leave the problem of closures inside
> methods, though...
> If xPrivateName is a private name object, then there's no reason to "forget
> about accessing private properties of other objects". Both
> this[xPrivateName] and other[xPrivateName] work as you would expect.
> /be
You are very much right. What are the open issues with privates in classes

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list