Recently Claus Reinke proposed some alternative that I think feels is
so much more natural and simpler than <| or beget:
..
.. re-interpretation deleted ..
Ahem;-) Glad to see my proposal noticed, but what I really
suggested, in
motivating <| as structure representation, not operator
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2011-November/018626.html
..
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?
My proposal was no separate proposal in the ES wiki sense, but a
suggestion about re-interpreting and modifying the existing proposal
about <| . Specifically, it
was to interpret
proto <| {..}
as a source representation of the unwritable
{ [[prototype]]: proto , .. }
As such, it inherits most aspects of the original proposal. In brief,
proto <| literal
is the object generated from literal, with [[prototype]] set to proto,
where the literal can be any object-generating literal (object, array,
regexp, or function).
The two modifications to the original proposal were:
- <| structurally represents an unnameable property;
so it does not need to modify its rhs, it only applies to
literals, and it can be used in destructuring
- <| only makes the [[prototype]] property representable;
so there is no special case for 'proto <| function', all
literals are treated the same way;
instead of modifying 'function's 'prototype' property,
one would write 'function(..){..; return super <| {..}}'
Claus
http://clausreinke.github.com/
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
