On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <al...@wirfs-brock.com>wrote:
> > On Oct 30, 2011, at 10:39 AM, John J Barton wrote: > > > In the abstract I would agree, but, in our world, every college > sophomore CS student learns a class based language and, in our world, > prototypical inheritance in JS uses a bizarre pattern of expression. > ES should work make this bizarre pattern unnecessary so prototypical > inheritance can shine. Using ".prototype" in new patterns heads in the > wrong direction: that is the comment I was making on Allen's proposal. > > > Note that my "class pattern" that was the topic at the beginning of this > thread is not a pattern for expression prototypal inheritance. It is a > pattern for expressing "classical" (ie, class-based) inheritance in > JavaScript using existing JavaScript terminology and conventions. > Thanks for that clarification. So now I just object to this entire enterprise ;-). In my opinion for new syntax to support classical inheritance should 1) target beginners and 2) help avoid the need for F.prototype/new F() pattern for simple inheritance. Creating a new, complex machine to support classical inheritance will result in lots of language discussions and a new round of libraries to work around the complexities. jjb
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
