Alternative syntax for <|

Rick Waldron waldron.rick at gmail.com
Wed Nov 16 11:31:34 PST 2011


As stated previously[1], my support for "begets" as pure win is unwavering.


Rick

[1] https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2011-October/017758.html




On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Dmitry Soshnikov <
dmitry.soshnikov at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 16.11.2011 23:12, Erik Arvidsson wrote:
>
>> One thing that all of these discussions are missing is the hoisting
>> property of function and any possible future classes. If we use "let
>> Point = ..." we lose all hoisting and the order of your declarations
>> starts to matter and we will end up in the C mess where forward
>> references do not work.
>>
>>  No matter, we may rewrite it with `var':
>
> // parent object
> var point = {x: 10, y: 20};
>
> // child object
> var point3D extends point {
>
>  z: 30
> }
>
> // a class
> class Point3D extends Point {
>  constructor (x, y, z) { ... }
> }
>
> It seems interesting for me, since we define both -- child classes and
> child objects with the same syntactic construction; only `var' and `class'
> keywords change.
>
> Dmitry.
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/**listinfo/es-discuss<https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20111116/ea8c9191/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list