David Herman wrote:
On Aug 8, 2012, at 5:01 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
The problem is that neither = nor Object.defineProperty can be used succinctly
and reliably to shadow or override.
OK, that's the real problem, thanks for making it clear -- sorry if I missed it
before.
No problem. The "succinctly and reliably" conjunction is important, but
it's not an argument for new syntax, by itself. I think we agree that an
API such as Object.update would solve most of the problem, if not all
("succinctly"). Object.update could be polyfilled, to boot.
So then the question becomes: how common should it be, then? Are the use cases
it addresses common enough to warrant new syntax?
It's hard to say for sure, but I find the class "statics" use-case
compelling, since maximin classes don't have any declarative support for
class-side properties.
Especially syntax that looks like a new variation on an existing thing. ("Wait,
which kind of assignment do I need to use here?")
That does look like trouble, now that you and Doug point it out. We have
spiraled around .{ and := but not .= -- would .= be better?
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
