Two kinds of  (was: Re: shortcuts for defining block-local private names, plays nicely with @foo syntax)
allen at wirfs-brock.com
Mon Jan 23 15:21:22 PST 2012
On Jan 23, 2012, at 1:14 PM, Herby Vojčík wrote:
> Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
>>> Losing generic  as a way to access all "native" properties of the
>>> object is big price.
>> I wonder if it really is such a big price: isn’t  mainly used for
>> objects as maps from strings to values? Then you should use something
>> else in ES6, anyway (SimpleMap, possibly dict, possibly other map
>> implementations). For the few remaining cases, Object.getProperty() (or
>> something similar) should do just fine.
> Hm. Well, maybe you are right.
> But it gets harder with getters and setters... maybe if there was an API for simulating proper legacy foo[bar] and foo[bar]=baz, (Object.get, Object.set?) generic  could be dropped without much of a loss.
It sounds like you need to read http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:object_model_reformation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss