>>> I like Underscore (http://documentcloud.github.com/underscore/). Should we >>> standardize it? Not yet. But it points in the right direction to avoid OOP >>> single-inheritance traps: functional programming, generic for all >>> containers functions. >> >> I love true generic functions (as in “multiple dispatch”) and think that >> they would be a good match for JS (not any time soon, but one can dream). I >> see generic functions as complementary to single dispatch (including >> prototypes). Reenskaug and Coplien [1] seem to agree. Generic functions are >> also great for working with data coming from web services (e.g. JSON). > > I did not mean multimethods ("generic functions" is a confusing term, since > it also means functions that work for parameters of any time; also "generic" > suggests "generics", i.e. type parameters).
Understood, but generic functions (the way that Common Lisp and Dylan use that term) are a logical extension of JavaScript’s generic functions (the way ES-262 uses that term). Right now, JS generic functions have implicit contracts that one could make explicit (e.g. via some kind of duck typing). Type guards also seem loosely related. > ES4 had a proposal for multimethods but I doubt it will make a come-back. > Adding another dispatch mechanism to JS is a very hard sell. Right. That’s where my dreams come in. ;-) -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer [email protected] twitter.com/rauschma home: rauschma.de blog: 2ality.com _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
