On Nov 19, 2011, at 3:14 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: > That's the point: it's not just a method. It is a special form. In classes as > proposed where the name was 'constructor', or if it's 'new' as in Dave's > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:minimal_classes proposal. It > is not just another method that happens to have a catchy name.
See the desugaring in Dave's proposal for why, and consider how 'constructor' doesn't matter. We could call it 'snoopy' and there would still be special-ness to the form, extra semantics that any old method of a name other than the one we pick for the constructor would not have. /be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
