They want magic most of time anyway :-) I wasn't saying enumerable and others are keywords aren't a bad idea, I'm say when you import to class you would probably expect non enumerable anyway, and too verbose class declarations aren't that good-looking.
Hope you got my point. Regards On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Glen Huang <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the examples. But I wonder why beat around the bush and not let > developers express exactly what they want? > > > On Feb 20, 2015, at 5:51 PM, Leon Arnott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Ah, right, my apologies for misreading. > > > > So... I think this scenario would be better served if ES7 had shorthands > for non-(enumerability|writability|configurability) added to the object > literal syntax, as some in the past have postulated - and a method for > copying non-enumerable (and also symbol-keyed) properties was available. > > > > ``` > > class Foo { ... } > > > > Object.copyOwnProperties(Foo.prototype, { > > noenum bar, /* Assigns 'bar' to the object, making it non-enumerable > and non-writable */ > > noenum additionalMethod() { ... }, > > noenum *[Symbol.iterator]() { ... }, > > }); > > ``` > > > > Object.assign vs Object.copyOwnProperties may seem awkward, but it's > arguably comparable to the Object.keys/Object.getOwnPropertyNames dichotomy > - one for the common case, one for the thorough case. (I'm aware that > Object.getOwnPropertyNames is deprecated in favour of Reflect.ownKeys, > though.) > > > > In cases where all the methods are new, this could be "simplified" to: > > > > ``` > > Object.copyOwnProperties(Foo.prototype, class { > > baz() { ... } > > *[Symbol.iterator]() { ... } > > }.prototype); > > ``` > > > > Of course, while writing all this I just thought of yet another problem: > there's no way to copy accessors using this hypothetical > Object.copyOwnProperties. > > > > Maybe there should also be a specially tuned method on Function: > > > > ``` > > Function.assign(Foo, class { > > qux() {...} > > *[Symbol.iterator] {...} > > get flib() {...} > > static flab() {...} > > }); > > ``` > > > > And let copyOwnProperties be used for assigning existing methods. > > > > Classes are kind of an awkward data structure, I must say. :| > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
