On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Bob Nystrom <rnyst...@google.com> wrote:
> > A constructor is different from a regular function. Instead of returning > the value that the body of the function returns, it returns a special > newly-created object. > Sorry, already you lost me ;-) I guess you mean the operand of "new"? If so, then the different thing is the operator 'new'. It's "new" that makes the operand a constructor. > Likewise, a generator is a special function that doesn't return what the > body returns. > But it does not look special. There is nothing similar to 'new' involved in the invocation of the generator. > Instead, it returns an object that lets you interrupt and resume that > function. This object exposes a next() method. When you call that, the > function runs until it hits a yield. When it does, the function is paused > at that point, and the result of the yield is returned from next(). The > next time you call next() it picks up from there and continues. > and the state of the generator is hidden from the developer as far as I can tell. I think generators are an excellent example of a feature that is well prototyped (in FF JS 1.7+). I think the developer uptake is minimal, outside of the original advocates. I don't hear any clamor for other browsers to implement this feature. If generators never go further, that is an awesome outcome and we owe Dave Herman and other proponents of generators a lot of thanks for their efforts. Either way, "class" deserves at least as much investigation. jjb
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
