On Dec 21, 2010, at 10:41 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
> Again you seem to be confusing the "inherited soft fields" proposal with
> the *separate* proposal on desugaring the private name syntax to inherited
> soft fields.
I think I may have been misunderstanding what Mark was actually
proposing/advocating, then. I'm happy to be disabused of my mis-reading.
But on re-reading, I still can't quite make sense of the "Can we subsume
Names?" section. There are two syntactic components to the private names
proposal:
(1) the bracket-notation is generalized to recognize private name values to
look for private properties
(2) the dot-notation and colon-notation are generalized to use private names
when their property name is bound by a |private| declaration
But the "Can we subsume Names?" subsection seems to mix these two cases up. To
match up with (1), you'd need to interpret *all* bracket notation as a
potential lookup of a soft field, i.e. something like:
e1[e2] ~~>
let (t1 = e1, t2 = e2) {
=> t2 instanceof SoftField
? t2.get(t1)
: t1[t2]
}
(where the rewritten brackets are the "true" brackets, i.e., not re-desugared).
Dave
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
