Complete Minimal Classes

Kevin Smith khs4473 at gmail.com
Fri Apr 6 13:27:26 PDT 2012


Looking at Allen's collection classes, it's clear that our maximally
minimal classes aren't sufficient for describing a large subset of the
classes we might want to create.  As a general goal, I think that a
complete class syntax should be able to express all of the external
interface of the class, for all except a small set of edge cases.  I
believe the following features are missing:

1) A way to add methods to the constructor.
2) A way to add arbitrary properties to the constructor.
3) A way to add arbitrary properties to the prototype.

I'd also like to add a fourth feature:

4) The ability to separately define the [[Call]] and [[Construct]] behavior
of the constructor.

I've created a couple of gists with a variant of our minimal classes which
is intended to provide these features:

https://gist.github.com/2319957
https://gist.github.com/2322512

I've used "static" as a keyword.  I know it's a misnomer - but it's not too
bad as misnomers go.  I've also left out private members and private names,
as IMO they are an orthogonal concern.

Let me know what you think - and thanks for your time everyone!


kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20120406/6ce8c691/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list