On Sep 29, 2011, at 5:41 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > Presumably the job of the constructor is to establish invariants of the > constructed instances. Some of those invariants may involve complex > relationships among property values and between the new object and other > objects. There are many ways that an object can escape from a constructor > before these invariants are fully established. Why is the "const" invariant > any more important than other invariants that we aren't attempting to > guarantee?
Perhaps it shouldn't be, but then (we've agreed) such invariants as temporal dead zone error on read before initialization *are* important for const bindings. So if these const-ish property definitions in classes have different invariants, they ought not use the 'const' keyword. But as we discussed, this takes a toll too. Now users have to learn the new keyword or punctuator, and how it differs from 'const'. /be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
