evenstensberg at gmail.com
Thu May 26 22:25:06 UTC 2016
That's one of the reasons why GitHub is a better place to discuss this ;)
As I tried to say, this is work in progress, meaning I'd like input on this
as well as improvements on the actual proposal.
As by last line, what is it that you don't understand? Hit me up at GitHub
and I'll try to clear things up.
For future discussions, I'd like to keep things such as this on GitHub, so
if you got any replies you want to take, do it there.
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Bergi <a.d.bergi at web.de> wrote:
> … was bad typed by me there.
> Indeed it was.
> I tried to explain why I
>> mean that this isn't a real object by saying that it doesn't contain
>> prototype or constructor and thereby people got the analogy. Often when I
>> say things are not things, as by object is not objects, I assume people
>> manage to reason without having to pin facts straight into their faces.
> Sorry, but this approach isn't going to work on this mailing list here or
> when you are going to write a technical document like a spec proposal.
> Don't talk in (bad) metaphors, state facts and use precise language.
> We still don't understand how your `Reflect.create` is supposed to work or
> be implemented, how it is different from the old approach, and what exactly
> its advantage(s) will be.
> Kind regards,
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss