> Given this meaning of "class" when testing a value, I'm not sure if we can
> rescue the pun above by which we use the same operator to define a class. If
> forced to choose only one of these two roles for the "class" keyword, I'd
> prefer to use it only to define a class, not to test values. But having only
> just noticed this discrepancy, I am also not sure we cannot rescue the pun.
> Let's try.
Is a dual role even necessary? Why not stick to just class declaration? Looking
through the eyes of an outsider, class { ... } looks like a class declaration.
Given that we already have typeof and instanceof, wouldn’t an outsider expect a
name such as classof? Furthermore, if object exemplars and function exemplars
are to exist in parallel. Then:
function Foo() {};
var f = new Foo();
classof f === Foo // true
let Foo = {};
var f = new Foo();
classof f === Foo // true
The above would not hold for `class`.
--
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
