Mark S. Miller wrote:
My position on private symbols.
My position on classes is and has always been that classes are worth
introducing into the language*only* if they give us, or can be used
with, an affordable means for true object encapsulation. Assuming
Allen is right about what actual implementors will do (which I find
plausible) then WeakMaps are not that means. Given other discussions,
I am confident that the objects-as-closures pattern will not become
efficient either -- it is likely to continue to cost an allocation per
method per instance as its semantics naively suggests. So of the
options practically on the table, I think private symbols are the only
workable choice. If this is correct, then I consider private symbols
to be a requirement. Am I missing anything?
I agree, but David Bruant is arguing for weakmap-with-hint still, and
Kevin is arguing (my summary) "YAGNI" to high-integrity privacy, not
exclusively but for most developers -- and for the SES minority,
weakmaps are enough.
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
