> It seems like an unfortunate inconvenience to require any code refactoring
> and lose the shorthand @ this-access if you just want to make a private
> property on an object be public. Instead of just restricting the token to
> the right of a @ or .@ construct be a private name, perhaps it would be
> useful to also permit an explicitly declared public name?
I wouldn’t mix public and private, but it would be nice to have symmetry – only
having a `this` shortcut for private names feels odd. How about the following?
function Point(everyone, secret) {
this.everyone = everyone;
this.@secret = secret;
}
//---- Short:
function Point(everyone, secret) {
.everyone = everyone;
.@secret = secret;
}
//---- Shorter:
function Point(this.everyone, this.@secret) {
}
//---- Shortest:
function Point(.everyone, .@secret) {
}
To me, consistency is much more important than saving characters.
--
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
