On Mar 23, 2012, at 2:48 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
> On 23 March 2012 08:42, Claus Reinke <[email protected]> wrote:
> - would it make sense to name the constructor after the class
> (avoiding 'constructor' and 'new')?
>
> -1.
>
> I always considered this a bad choice of C++-derived class systems. It
> violates Don't-repeat-yourself, and thus is annoying e.g. when you rename
> things. It is less searchable and less readable locally, because you have to
> take the name of the surrounding class into account to decide what kind of
> declaration you are looking at. And it doesn't scale to anonymous classes, in
> case these ever become an option for ES
Not to mention that there is no particular reason than instance method can't
have the same name as its class:
class Point {} {
constructor(x,y) {
thls.x = x;
this.y = y;
}
Point () {
return this
}
}
Allen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
