On Nov 22, 2011, at 10:54 AM, Bob Nystrom wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Nothing there about arrays or regular expressions, and the function examples
> do *not* show anything like
>
> superFun <| function (...) {...}
>
> Instead of Ahem'ing, could you cite what you claim is a prior proposal with
> specifics showing how it addresses object, array, regexp and function
> [[Prototype]] presetting?
>
> I'm guessing this been proposed before but I think you could handle all of
> those except RegExp with syntax something like:
>
> // object:
> { extends someObj, prop1: value, prop2: value }
>
> // array:
> [ extends someObj, value1, value2 ]
>
> // function declaration:
> function foo(arg) extends someObj { ... }
>
> // function expression:
> function(arg) extends someObj { ... }
>
> You could maybe cram it into RegExp with something like:
>
> /pattern/ extends someObj;
>
> I haven't been following the <| discussion closely (it seems like it's in
> good hands and has lots of smart people poking at it) so forgive me if this
> was proposed and rejected for valid reasons while I wasn't looking. :)
You (and others) are roughly working backwards along the path that ultimately
led to the invention of <|.
Some of the concerns about the "embedded" approach:
You are introducing several syntactic forms that have to be learned an
remembered instead of just one.
Your examples are only consider examples where the "proto" value is a simple
identifier reference:
function (arg) extends {extends Function.prototype, method1: function() {},
method2() {}} { ...}
contrast with
Function.prototype <| {method1: function() {}, method2: function() {}} <|
function (arg) {...}
To handle RegExps you have to introduce something that looks like an operator
but is even more specialized than <|.
You can't handle numeric or string literals. This may seem like a stretch, but
consider:
UTF16StringProto <| "a string containing UTF 16 surrogate pairs"
where UTF16StringProto has versions of the string methods that understand how
to treat surrogate pairs as logically single characters.
A pseudo binary operator like <| (whatever your preferred spelling) still seems
to me like the most directly and least intrusive way to deal with all of these
scenarios.
Allen_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
