On Jun 9, 2015, at 9:23 AM, Kevin Smith
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Anyway, I'm curious to know why do you think getters and setters are OK and
properties are not. I don't see any technical difference, specially considering
get/set for lazy property computation/assignment through the prototype getter
anyway.
Syntax for putting properties on the prototype was long-ago rejected because of
footgun potential. Users will naturally tend to think of them as per-instance,
instead of shared, which leads to bugs.
Another way of eliminating the footgun potential is not allowing non-primitive
defaults on properties. Any non-primitive properties would always default to
undefined, forcing you to later initialize it yourself in the constructor.
Defining the property without a default would just be a way to defining what
the type is supposed to be. As far as I can tell this is what other languages
do - non-primitive types are not allowed as property defaults. That makes sense
to me.
```js
class Person {
name String: “John”
items Array
constructor() {
this.items = [“food"];
}
}
```
Also static properties are on __proto__, so it seems a bit strange that
instance properties would not also be on .prototype. Somewhat of a consistency
issue I suppose.
(My fault for dragging this a bit off topic. TMI in my description of class
properties…)
Luke
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
