2012/10/20 Axel Rauschmayer <[email protected]> > https://gist.github.com/3918227 > > I’m wondering what this approach does better. > Originally, it really was to give some (built-in) syntactic sugar to (Weak)Map. No plan to make objects better. At most sharing a simpler object model than the ES5 one.
> Given the 3 objects-as-maps pitfalls [1], we have: > > 1. Accidentally accessing inherited properties: fixed > 2. Can’t safely invoke methods, because those might be overridden: still a > problem (right?) > 3. __proto__: fixed > I see what I've written as maps with sugar, not really as objects. maps-as-objects if you will :-) Specifically, calling "methods" makes almost no sense... Maybe it does actually. Interesting. I need to give it more thoughts. About your second point, it assumes that we want all objects to have Object.prototype methods. I'm not so sure it should be a goal. I'm glad it's possible to not inherit from Object.prototype as well as being able to shadow properties. About maps-as-objects, they have no inheritance, so I'm not sure the second point applies to it. About the third point, maps-as-objects are indeed better, because all problems with pseudo-properties are avoided without sacrifying syntax (which all other solutions have to do). David
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
