Yehuda Katz wrote:
Agreed. For example:
class Post {
}
class Comment {
}
Post.hasMany("comments");
Comment.belongsTo("post");
let post = new Post()
let comment = new Comment();
comment.post = post;
post.comments //=> [comment]
I'm with Allen: you shoulda used a method!
I know, this is all allowed, so it will happen. We're talking "Design
Rules" here, which the language cannot enforce. But really, too much
spooky setter action at a distance, even for bidirectionally-linked objects.
/be
This is similar to certain DOM APIs, and my expectation of a
hypothetical version of Ember Data in ES6 would work. I don't think
there is anything wrong with using an accessor here.
Yehuda Katz
(ph) 718.877.1325
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Erik Arvidsson
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Brendan Eich
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> * get/set accessor may have effects on 'set' (see the DOM) but
only on the
> receiver object (and unobservably, any children that become
garbage, e.g.
> when trimming .length on an array-like).
That is very limiting, even as a guideline. Any time there are two or
more related objects it is very likely that a setter might affect some
other object.
--
erik
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
