On class literals possibly not making it into ECMAScript.next

Rick Waldron waldron.rick at gmail.com
Fri Nov 4 16:28:43 PDT 2011


No, not at all. It's a conscious design decision that results in only
introducing one new property to the global object (two if you count the
shorthand reference to $)

Rick

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Axel Rauschmayer <axel at rauschma.de> wrote:

> But isn’t jQuery.bar() just a work-around, because JavaScript does not
> have modules, yet?
>
> On Oct 30, 2011, at 21:05 , Rick Waldron wrote:
>
> This pattern makes is _very_ easy for newer developers/adopters to
> understand the division of functionality:
>
> - DOM methods here: jQuery().foo()
> - Everything else here: jQuery.bar()
>
>
>        --
> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
> axel at rauschma.de
>
> home: rauschma.de
> twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
> blog: 2ality.com
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20111104/fd2171b9/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list