Default constructor and extends null

Allen Wirfs-Brock allen at wirfs-brock.com
Wed Aug 1 10:01:13 PDT 2012


I forget the second question, regarding empty constructors.

On Jul 31, 2012, at 9:46 PM, Erik Arvidsson wrote:

> ...

> Should we special
> case this and use an empty constructor if the super class is null?
> 

Yes, seem necessary.  The default definition used for an empty constructor would then be something like:

 constructor(...args) {
      try  {super.constructor} catch (e) {return};
      super(...args);
}

In the actual specification, I wouldn't use an exception but instead use the internal GetSuperBase operation in the guard.

Allen

      




More information about the es-discuss mailing list