I just spent significant time trying to clarify why it does matter, at least to some of us. In addition, I started with a quote from MarkM concerning an observable semantic difference.
Finally, I don't recall mentioning you in anyway nor directing that message to you other than as a cc via the es-discuss list. Allen On Dec 23, 2010, at 3:57 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote: > On 2010-12-23 23:51, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: >> I believe that your "camp" wants to think of soft fields, stored in a >> side-table, as extensions of an object. My "camp" thinks of such >> side-tables as a means of recording information about an object without >> actually extending the object. > > These are obviously alternative views of the same thing -- as MarkM and > I have made clear throughout. It really doesn't matter whether you view > the object has having been "extended" or not, if that is semantically > unobservable. > > (And I don't like people trying to tell me what "camp" I'm in, thankyou.) > > -- > David-Sarah Hopwood ⚥ http://davidsarah.livejournal.com > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
