Yet another class declaration proposal

[Allen Wirfs-Brock]

+1,000,000

Minor quibbles

get rid of
   [incAge]: ...
just make it
   @incAge

we don't need both [propname] and @propname in property declarations and @propname has a narrower meaning (which is good).  Also, I don't want to unnecessarily couple object/class declaration syntax with [ ] semantics.

You don't show other at foo but we need it.  I would prefer it to be written as other. at foo

You don't show it, but I would be fine with @foo as an abreavation for this at foo but if it is available we could probably get away with requiring this. at foo

I know this will be controversial, but I would prefer only having the expression form.  The reason is that

let Monster =  Being <| mylib.mixin(Evil, Scary) <| class {...}

is an important usecase and it is harder to make the syntax work with a pure class declaration.

allen









On Nov 3, 2011, at 9:14 AM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote:

> FWIW: I’ve picked what I like from the various proposals.
> 
> https://gist.github.com/1336846
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
> axel at rauschma.de
> 
> home: rauschma.de
> twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
> blog: 2ality.com
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>