I've refactored the project, more yet to come, but have a look: https://github.com/ev1stensberg/proposal-reflect-or. Still need to put up an example and implementation details ( currently on the to-do list)
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 3:33 AM, G. Kay Lee < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Even, > > I think everyone who has replied above has all been offering some very > constructive feedbacks for you to chew on. The key takeway, if you haven't > noticed already, is that your understanding of the language is flawed, and > people simply cannot help you or continue their discussions with you > because of that. > > We're here to discuss really technical things and every tiniest detail has > the need to be clarified, but that doesn't mean we're being harsh at you. > However, you need to bring your knowledge of the language up to a certain > level before jumping into the water. This is something only you can help > yourself. > > > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 9:08 AM, even stensberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Is there anything bad about getting feedback before reiteration? This was >> meant for having some feedback and improvements. If you got some input, you >> are free to join by submitting a issue on GitHub! >> >> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 2:59 AM, Renki Ivanko <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Everything about this is confusing; you should slow down and think >>> things through more. >>> >>> R. >>> >>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 1:25 AM, even stensberg <[email protected] >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> That's one of the reasons why GitHub is a better place to discuss this >>>> ;) >>>> >>>> As I tried to say, this is work in progress, meaning I'd like input on >>>> this as well as improvements on the actual proposal. >>>> >>>> As by last line, what is it that you don't understand? Hit me up at >>>> GitHub and I'll try to clear things up. >>>> >>>> For future discussions, I'd like to keep things such as this on GitHub, >>>> so if you got any replies you want to take, do it there. >>>> >>>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Bergi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> … was bad typed by me there. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Indeed it was. >>>>> >>>>> I tried to explain why I >>>>>> mean that this isn't a real object by saying that it doesn't contain >>>>>> prototype or constructor and thereby people got the analogy. Often >>>>>> when I >>>>>> say things are not things, as by object is not objects, I assume >>>>>> people >>>>>> manage to reason without having to pin facts straight into their >>>>>> faces. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, but this approach isn't going to work on this mailing list here >>>>> or when you are going to write a technical document like a spec proposal. >>>>> Don't talk in (bad) metaphors, state facts and use precise language. >>>>> >>>>> We still don't understand how your `Reflect.create` is supposed to >>>>> work or be implemented, how it is different from the old approach, and >>>>> what >>>>> exactly its advantage(s) will be. >>>>> >>>>> Kind regards, >>>>> >>>>> Bergi >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
