proposal: Object Members

Jordan Harband ljharb at
Mon Jul 23 20:30:07 UTC 2018

`class` is already not just syntactic sugar, so that notion isn't correct,
and shouldn't be maintained.

On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Ranando King <kingmph at> wrote:

> I've written up a new draft proposal based on my own work with ES5 & ES6
> compatible classes with fields. That can be found [here](
> I'm already aware of
> the class-members proposal, but I think it breaks far to many things and
> doesn't do anything to maintain the notion that "`class` is just syntactic
> sugar".
> This proposal is specifically based on the code [here](
> rdking/Class.js/tree/master/es6c). I've also got a [](
> that shows the same
> code running.
> The idea behind the proposal is that instead of injecting a lot of new
> logic into how `class` works, let's allow `class` to remain syntactic
> sugar, and put that extra ability into object declarations instead. Then
> simply allow `class` to do the same with it's own prototypes.
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list