Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
On Mar 21, 2012, at 12:42 , Herby Vojčík wrote:
Yeah, they are pushing it hardly this way. It seems inevitable...
I am willing to accept it, but I'd like to have a clear mapping from
object initializer components into class body components - if it is
there, I don't care about syntax (the main concern for me is, that if
certain things are possible in object initializer, they should be either:
- known to be banned in class, or
- straightforwardly mappable
That brings the question: what about static block? I think it should
have exactly same rules as the basic class block (sans possibility
having its own nested static block). That is, what about that const?
Is data allowed in static (const-only or let as well) but not in
class; or is it possible in class as well (which means, it defines
shared data thing in prototype)?
“I think it should have exactly same rules as the basic class block” – I
agree 100%.
Const is indeed tricky – I always liked the # sigil proposal for object
literals, but I don’t think they can work with this syntax. Const only
means non-writable and makes just as much sense for methods. Shared data
(as in “properties whose values are not functions”) should not be
allowed for the prototype, because it makes no sense.
But then you are negating yourself - if you allow it for static but not
for prototype, then they are not 100% same... if I can add shared data
in static, I should be able to add it to prototype - or vice versa, I
can not add it to either one.
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
