Class double-bind

Mark S. Miller erights at google.com
Wed Mar 4 15:52:52 UTC 2015


On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Andreas Rossberg <rossberg at google.com>
wrote:
[...]

> (On the other hand, I do think that it probably was a serious mistakes to
> make class bindings mutable.)
>

Will be part of the "const class" proposal from <
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:classes#const> to be revived
at some point for a future ES. Such const classes also have much in common
with classes in your <positive-adjective>Script proposal, and probably
should have more. Indeed, I think we should unbundle much of the classes
from <positive-adjective>Script into const classes.





> /Andreas
>
>
>
> On 4 March 2015 at 13:23, Jason Orendorff <jason.orendorff at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I guess we are just going to disagree here. Double bindings with
>> mutability still seem clearly bad. I can't make sense of the rationale
>> that classes can cope with every external binding being mutable except
>> for, somehow, their own name, and we're doing users a favor by
>> "protecting" them from "tampering" for just this one binding in this
>> one place.
>>
>> -j
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>


-- 
    Cheers,
    --MarkM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150304/801a0fd4/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list