I noted some open issues on "Classes with Trait Composition"

Brendan Eich brendan at mozilla.com
Mon May 23 10:59:41 PDT 2011


On May 23, 2011, at 10:48 AM, Mark S. Miller wrote:

> Static members on classes are generative merely because classes are generative:
> 
>     function makeFoo() {
>       return class Foo {
>         static x = Math.random();
>         //...
>       }
>     }
> 
> Your reply to Dave makes use of generative module functions. Yes, if we have generative module functions then my objection disappears. Modules would then also be generative.

Not without the module-function head syntax, or we lose lexical scope with static errors for typos, though. The last issue is huge, and it does not affect only import M.*.

Possibly we have different undrestandings of module functions, but the base module system is static and second class. This should be unchanged by any extension, and extensions building on module system should not have "too different" semantics (I'm a broken record on this; also I agree it bites generators, wherefore the function*(){} minimal generator syntax idea. The syntax difference need not be huge,but it should be distinctive).

/be



More information about the es-discuss mailing list