On Oct 31, 2011, at 5:45 AM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
>> "beget" sounds very much like what we want, but I just wanted to raise a
>> point about understanding and adoption, especially for the language of
>> the web.
>
> I wouldn’t worry, all of a programming language is new vocabulary, anyway.
> You always have to learn semantics, so learning a new word (especially one
> that increases your English vocabulary) shouldn’t be a problem. My worry is
> more that it doesn’t read like a sentence. I would prefer
>
> const Employee = Person begets { ... };
That's an operator, it happens in an evaluation regime at a certain time. It
should use a pidgin-English word or phrase free of tense elaboration, as
delete, in, instanceof do.
> I think Java got it right with extends:
>
> class Employee extends Person { ... }
That's a declarative form, not an operator. It uses present tense to connote
timelessness, for all time (once the declaration has been processed).
/be
>
>> What about 'protofor'?
>> let obj = base protofor {a: 1, b: 2}
>> let arr = base protofor [p, q, r]
>> let fun = base protofor function (...args) { ... }
>> let re = base protofor /(\w+)\s+(\w)+/g
>>
>> Once again, for the specific case of functions, the proto operator has a
>> semantics that goes way beyond setting the [[prototype]] internal
>> property. Maybe 'protofor' for the [[prototype]] and 'beget' for the
>> constructor-related semantics?
>
>
> Even though it contradicts my previous rules, I still tremendously like
> “proto”: It does not create new vocabulary and has an operator-y feel to it.
>
> let obj = base proto {a: 1, b: 2}
> let arr = base proto [p, q, r]
> let fun = base proto function (...args) { ... }
> let re = base proto /(\w+)\s+(\w)+/g
>
> --
> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
> [email protected]
>
> home: rauschma.de
> twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
> blog: 2ality.com
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
