2008/8/25 Brendan Eich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Aug 25, 2008, at 7:07 PM, Erik Arvidsson wrote: > >> I've been quiet on these threads for a long time but i just wanted to emphasize Kris's point. Whatever we decide to desugar the class syntax into I think it is very important to get this right. We need to make classes work with existing prototype based inheritance chains. I would consider it a failure if I cannot create a class that inherits from dijit.TabPane or from a Prototype UI component for that matter. > > Can you define "inherit" more precisely? If it's a matter of giving classes .prototype objects, perhaps this could be done (it's attractive since the built-ins, Object, Date, etc., are classes as well as constructor functions, which have prototype objects).
Inherit as in setting up the [[Prototype]] chain in ES3 speak or as in extending the vtable from other languages. >> I would also like to know more about the arguments why people seem to be set on a zero inheritance class model? Does that imply that one can still achieve inheritance using prototypes or does it mean that inheritance is not desired at all? > > No, prototypes are here to stay. There's even Object.create to relieve prototypers from having to write constructor functions. > > The desire to explore ZI is two-fold: > > 1. It may help the committee to see the smallest possible proposal, and work up from there to SI and MI. > > 2. It may help the language to avoid adding another kind of inheritance than prototype-based delegation. Good to hear that. That fits well with what Kris said and what I also believe in. -- erik
_______________________________________________ Es-discuss mailing list Es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
