Let me make a gentle plea for not creating unnecessary controversy. Take a step
back: we all seem to agree we would like to provide a more convenient and
performant way to create private fields in objects. In terms of observable
behavior in the runtime model, there aren't that many differences
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 10:06 AM, David Herman dher...@mozilla.com wrote:
Let me make a gentle plea for not creating unnecessary controversy. Take a
step back: we all seem to agree we would like to provide a more convenient
and performant way to create private fields in objects.
Yes. We
If I define an object with both valueOf and toString methods:
var color = {
valueOf: function () { return 0xff; }
,toString: function () { return 'red'; }
}
The rules of `+` result in:
color + 1 = 16711681
color + '' = '16711680'
This is because of:
11.6.1 The Addition
On Dec 17, 2010, at 2:01 PM, P T Withington wrote:
11.6.1 The Addition operator(+)
...
7. If Type(lprim) is String or Type(rprim) is String, then
a. Return the String that is the result of concatenating ToString(lprim)
followed by ToString(rprim)
...
Is it intentional that after
On Dec 16, 2010, at 9:11 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
I don't like the private names syntax. I think it obscures more than it
helps usability, and losing the x[id] === x.id equivalence is a significant
loss.
Again, this equivalence has never held in JS for all possible characters in a
5 matches
Mail list logo
