I'm definitely in favor of this <| proposal, btw.
That sort of pattern certainly can be repeated if push comes to shove.
But I believe doing so is far inferior to dedicated, first-class
syntactical support to make the semantics absolutely unambiguous and
un-confusable with anything else.
This makes sense. I just want to make sure that the fundamental
capability to subclass built-in objects is available via libraries for
text/javascript, with the new syntax offering the more performant option
for text/harmony.
I'm pretty sure current `text/javascript` can sub-class safely, as FuseBox
(from @fusejs) does with sandboxing natives. It's hacky, and relies on the
non-standard __proto__ in most browsers (iframe in others), but it IS
possible. Perhaps we should still formalize it, if we think
`text/javascript` is gonna be around for a long time in parallel with
ES.Next that has something like <|.
--Kyle
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
