Mislav Marohnic' wrote: > ... > > In conclusion, my philosophy is: > > * no magic properties except "initialize" > * keep the inheritance support code simple and short , otherwise > it makes no sense in having it > * leave room for users to make their own additions to the > inheritance support code > * no dollar-signs and underscores because they indicate bad design > (exceptions from this rule are $super/$parent) > * don't try to make defining of classes look like you're writing > Ruby, it simply won't work. > This is EXACTLY how I feel--your whole post. Much better than I could say it. As far as the superchaining property, I like (1) $super, (2) $parent.
+1 for simple and short support for inheritance in Prototype I'd also like to throw in the idea that we need to prove the final OO-design decisions with use cases. We can write animal-sounds code all day long, but JavaScript is such a unique language, I think we ought to prove the design by creating some actual web-app Widgets that become quicker to write and become more maintainable and extensible by using OO patterns. The need for advanced OO JavaScript is such an edge case right now--I think we need to prove its real-world value. --Ken Snyder --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
