> 'final' already means "can't be overridden" for methods and "can't be > extended by subclassing" for classes in several languages. Adding another > meaning, even if it's of the same "mood", seems like a bad idea to me. > > What's the point of your request? If you mean to promote "AOP"
I don't know what the connection would be. > (a sacred cow, per my last message to you, reply-less :-P) I ran out of arguments :). > , you risk degrading overall integrity, or merely imposing a syntax tax > as most class users have to say "inextensible class" (kidding, but it > would have some contextual keyword in front -- and not "static"). Just a idea for budget cuts, it's rejection doesn't bother me, not an important issue to me. Kris _______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list Es4-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
