Finding a "safety syntax" for classes
claus.reinke at talk21.com
Fri Mar 23 15:20:46 PDT 2012
>> - would it make sense to name the constructor after the class
>> (avoiding 'constructor' and 'new')?
That seems to be a 'no', then:-) It might be useful to document
such obvious but rejected options, with counterarguments:
- repeated name
- readability/search concerns (constructor determined non-locally,
by class name matching)
- what to do about anonymous classes?
- preempts class name as prototype property
The various arguments revolving about names and anonymous
classes suggest another alternative:
- use an anonymous function declaration in the class as the
Again, I'm not arguing in favor or against, I'm only looking
for alternative design options.
More information about the es-discuss