new strawman: syntactic support for private names

Herby Vojčík herby at mailbox.sk
Wed Aug 29 04:28:58 PDT 2012


Yes, I also would like to know why this simpler older model was not good 
enough.

Herby

Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
> Couldn’t you have the same advantages if:
> - obj. at foo was syntactic sugar for obj[foo]
> - @foo was syntactic sugar for [foo] (method definitions, property
> definitions, etc.)
>
> foo would be a normal variable and the following two statements would be
> equivalent:
> private foo;
> let foo = new Name();
>
> foo containing a string would also work.
>
> That would be slightly simpler and go together well with your proposed
> object model reformation [1]:
> https://gist.github.com/3505466
>
> [1] http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:object_model_reformation
>
> On Aug 29, 2012, at 1:04 , Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com
> <mailto:allen at wirfs-brock.com>> wrote:
>
>> The strawman is at
>> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:syntactic_support_for_private_names
>>
>>
>> Allen
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
> --
> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
> axel at rauschma.de <mailto:axel at rauschma.de>
>
> home: rauschma.de <http://rauschma.de>
> twitter: twitter.com/rauschma <http://twitter.com/rauschma>
> blog: 2ality.com <http://2ality.com>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss


More information about the es-discuss mailing list