On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Mar 20, 2011, at 10:55 AM, Andrew Dupont wrote: > > > Right; I think Dean and I are saying that this would be the first time > obj.foo meant something different from obj['foo']. And to ascertain that > those two meant different things, I'd have to go searching through the code > for a `private foo` declaration. > > With the private name proposal obj.foo and obj.[#.foo] will always mean the > same thing regardless of whether foo is scoped as a private name or as a > regular property name. BTW, if you know that a property name is foo, why > would you ever code obj["foo"] instead of obj.foo? [ ] should only be > needed if the property name is not an identifier or is a computed value > (hence my original example). > In order to demonstrate the `obj["foo"] === obj.foo` equality you're example would need to set the foo identifier to "foo" instead of 0. I don't know if this behavior is explicitly promised as an invariant by the language but it's certainly something we've all come to expect. I remember this coming up once before WRT private names -- perhaps the benefits outweigh the costs of breaking this expectation, but it's definitely surprising.
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
