On Mar 24, 2012, at 10:20 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > On Mar 24, 2012, at 7:29 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: > > I suspect Dave misinterpreted Nadav's question. So did I, when I originally > read it.
Oh, yes, thanks for the clarification. I thought he was talking about the superclass position, but indeed he was talking about the prototype methods. He was clear, I just didn't read correctly. > To actually add a computed function as the value of a prototype object > property within the class definition is pretty much the same thing as > defining an arbitrary valued prototype data property. Defining non-method > prototype properties is one of the features that we have previous been unable > to reach consensus on and for that reason was intentionally excluded from the > maximal-minimal proposal. As the proposal says: > > "There is (intentionally) no direct declarative way to define either > prototype data properties (other than methods) class properties, or instance > property" > "Class properties and prototype data properties need be created outside the > declaration." Yeah, I think this is fine and future-proof for expanding on in the future. IOW, we're not against what Nadav's asking for, we're just trying to define the base level foundation for building on in the future. Dave
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
