On Mar 21, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Russell Leggett wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > I think its easier to explain - it will actually result in a constructor on > the prototype. > The actual constructor function and the .constructor property really should > always be in sync - this helps with that. > "new" doesn't have those benefits - people might expect to be able to call > .new() like in ruby. > "new" conflicts with the new <object> proposal. > There are some minor practical considerations on the "constructor" side, and > aesthetic considerations on the "new" side. Instead of squaring off now, can > we just agree to leave if off the table temporarily? > > Agreed, table it.
We have to make a decision or a spec. can't be written. There needs to at least be a stake in the ground. it looks to me like that stake is "constructor" Allen
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
