Brendan Eich wrote:
Herby Vojčík wrote:
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)?
What about statics? Maybe.
What about const? Later.
Protected? Later.
Bell #47, Whistle #99: Later.
No, no, I do not want to argue in adding this or that. I agree on
Russell's minimal classes.
I was just saying that it there should either be _both_ or _none_ of the
class/static block of Alex's proposal should allow consts/lets. I am
happy with none.
If we keep piling features and bells and whistles on, classes will never
happen. I am 100% sure of this.
We could have had minimal classes in ES6 last summer, but for
unfalsifiable future-proofing concerns about use-before-init re: const
and guards. We may still reach consensus on *minimal* classes. Never on
maximal classes.
/be
Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
