Harmony:classes static and private

Mark S. Miller erights at google.com
Wed Jun 8 16:16:48 PDT 2011


On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:

> Or that was what I intended in rewriting the earlier proposal. Thanks to
> Mark for fixing whatever was broken.
>

I haven't fixed it yet. Stay tuned.


>
> /be
>
> On Jun 8, 2011, at 3:40 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
>
> > On Jun 8, 2011, at 11:13 AM, Bob Nystrom wrote:
> >
> >> Either I'm out-of-date or the wiki page is. My understanding is that at
> the TC39 meetings we decided to move instance and private record
> declarations out of the class body and into the constructor. If that's the
> case, this should be less confusing. You can no longer use "public" or
> "private" at the class body level. So that example becomes:
> >
> > Yes, the proposal puts instance property/variable declarations in the
> constructor body.
> >
> > No, it does not outlaw private and even public for class body elements
> that define (without static or whatever we use instead of static) prototype
> properties.
> >
> > /be
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > es-discuss mailing list
> > es-discuss at mozilla.org
> > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>


-- 
    Cheers,
    --MarkM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20110608/ef0b4b7e/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list