On 10/01/10 18:49, Brendan Eich wrote:
It's not clear what private names are trying to do well. If they want
to provide privacy, they can't be visible to proxies. If they want to
provide extension without collision (i.e. namespacing), they should be
visible to Object.keys, enumeration, etc.
Allen: private syntax is the primary usage of this proposal. Debate
over whether there should be two independent concepts of scope or one
with a flag.
I think Allen's position is more on the "unique name" rather than truly "private
name" side of the trade-off. FWIW.
Oh, I see that sentence could be parsed in a way I didn't intend. Mea culpa.
What I meant when I wrote it was:
Allen: The syntax itself is the primary usage of this proposal. (The syntax happened to
use a keyword called "private", but the choice of words is less important.)
Waldemar
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
