It might help if you could clarify how your proposal diverges from the
class fields proposal that you linked to. From purely a syntactic view,
ignoring the type annotations, I don't see an obvious difference, so it is
hard to tell what your expectations are. You state "I have shown the idea
of declaring subobject default value declarations.", but I can't actually
tell what that means or what you intended to show. Is
```
defaults = {
a: 1,
b: 2
}
```
meant to create a property called `defaults`, or do something else?
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Aaron Gray <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 at 14:34, Ranando King <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Did you see any similarity with my proposal-object-members
>> <https://github.com/rdking/proposal-object-members>? It doesn't have
>> type annotation either. However, that's probably something best left to a
>> separate proposal since it would affect private and public members alike.
>>
>
> This looks excellent.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
