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 prototype-core@googlegroups.com
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to