On 18 February 2014 10:43, Yehuda Katz <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 5:17 AM, Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:50 PM, C. Scott Ananian >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Since both Chrome and FIrefox have plans to support Promises, feel >> > free to suggest any changes to `es6-shim` which would improve >> > compatibility. It looks like that at the moment the `es6-shim` >> > implementation is more spec-compliant than either of the shipping >> > implementations? In particular, we support subclasses. >> >> It will take a long time before browsers support subclassing in >> general as far as I can tell. > > I don't know where you're getting this from. @@create is the way classes and > subclassing work in ES6, and any browser that wants to implement class > syntax will need to deal with it. > > It may not be at the top of anyone's February 2014 hit-list, but I don't get > any sense that classes are low priority for browser vendors either.
"Classes" consist of many parts. The @@create hook only is relevant to enable subclassing of built-ins, and classes are useful without it. I think what Anne is alluding to is that for implementations, @@create probably is a pain to implement, and the part with the lowest benefit/cost ratio, and thus not particularly high on anybody's priority list. /Andreas _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
