process.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Osmany, Angus Croll, or Nicholas
Zakas I know that there usually won’t be any errors. It might make sense for
someone to curate the considerable introductory material that is out there.
That could be complemented by a peer review process.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home
.
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es
of tricky
to know when to stop traversing the prototype chain, so the more
straightforward solution is to make a copy and modify there or to
non-destructively merge:
https://developer.yahoo.com/yui/3/examples/yui/yui-merge.html
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter
use a
contextual keyword immediately after 'for':
for own (i in o) {
body
}
This is a small thing but it might pay off in the long run.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
Allen is proposing for [] to keep program domain and data domain
separate. Then dicts can actually get a size() method.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing
with “not interact badly” if there are indeed other use cases.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es
-discuss
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
the
blocking criteria is. Maybe an anti-spam trying to be smarter than it is?
That would be my guess, too.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es
is syntactic sugar for
x = rhs[0], y = rhs[1], z = rhs[2]
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org
Claus Reinke could not submit his js-tools discussion group announcement
(interestingly, I could do it for him). And the email I appended underneath my
signature never got through. Can someone explain the blocking criteria?
Thanks!
Axel
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
, anyway.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es
()
- Everything else here: jQuery.bar()
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
(stolenArray);
}
Bob(makeTable());
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
distinguish between
accessing a property and accessing a collection element. Then the former would
be done via Object.* methods, while the latter would be done via square
brackets.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
But hackedPush is added to the instance, not Array.prototype.
On Nov 4, 2011, at 18:59 , Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Nov 4, 2011, at 10:33 AM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
How about:
function Bob(t) {
var stolenArray;
var hackedPush = function() {
stolenArray
methods here: jQuery().foo()
- Everything else here: jQuery.bar()
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org
.
- Stricter mode could also restrict [] for arrays to just numbers, including
negative numbers for accessing elements relative to the end of an array.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
email):
- Never use objects as maps.
- Introduce collection classes.
- Try to make arrays fit into the collection framework.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss
() and Object.getProperty() when you want to compute the
name of a property.
- Stricter mode could also restrict [] for arrays to just numbers, including
negative numbers for accessing elements relative to the end of an array.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
FWIW: I’ve picked what I like from the various proposals.
https://gist.github.com/1336846
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
with class at all.
Why not just have
let Monster = Being | { ... }
This way we don't introduce the class keyword which is confusing and loaded
with assumptions about what it does and means.
https://gist.github.com/1336846
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
with a pure
class declaration.
Fine with me, I don’t have any preference in this regard.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https
then on your clients don't have to change a thing.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
[I’m sending this email for Claus Reinke, because when he sends it, es-discuss
blocks it]
There is a new mailing list for Javascript tool developers,
intended to complement the es-discuss list's language
design and specification topics:
http://groups.google.com/group/js-tools
Please see the
://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:modules
What would you want to standardize? It would be great if Node.js adopted AMD,
but at the very latest we’ll have a common standard via ES.next.
Axel
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
, I mean. So
one would want this.publicProp anyway. Between this consideration and the
preference for private, I'm fine stopping with @ for private.
I think the namespacing via this is a feature, it give the code a nice uniform
look:
if (this.foo === other.foo)
Axel
--
Dr. Axel
with your proposal or a general problem?
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
of the
other stuff you can even trivially get your minifier to desugar for
older browsers.
I don't think hard coding the name of the super-constructor is a
problem.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
other privacy needs I
use naming conventions, but there are people who don’t like that):
- Avoid name clashes (e.g. when mixing in a trait, but also when doing
subtyping).
- Enable special functionality. You could also use a naming convention here,
but using a name object is nicer.
--
Dr. Axel
list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https
deeper than 2nd level super-calls, then even call-stack is not needed.
See this implementation: https://gist.github.com/1330574#L68 (with
delete-restore the parent link technique).
Usage level with examples (line 95): https://gist.github.com/1330574#L95
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
is the code. https://gist.github.com/1331748
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
argument against something
grawlixy, though.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
= Person to { ... } // or any other preposition (prepositions
are like operators)
const Employee = Person parents { ... }
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing
to it.
let obj = base proto {a: 1, b: 2}
let arr = base proto [p, q, r]
let fun = base proto function (...args) { ... }
let re = base proto /(\w+)\s+(\w)+/g
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
”).
If people manage to get over their class bias (which is hard, because we have
been exposed to classes so much) then “begets” is a much more natural way of
doing things, because you always directly work with and connect objects.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter
a combination of two easy
words, so it shouldn’t be too hard to learn. I think it’s too late to remove
the English bias from JavaScript (kudos to Oracle for trying – they call their
JavaScript engine Nashorn).
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com
Note that for many non-native English speakers probably don't have many of
these words (including beget) in their vocabularies. For them, a symbolic
token such as | or : is probably just as meaningful.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
the same for “beget”?
But “begets” isn’t any better. Maybe “begetting”? The result can indeed be
described as Person begetting an object.
Person beget { ... } = ???
Is beget an imperative here or an infinitive?
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter
that the fact that it is not a verb disqualifies it.
German has a word for it, my dictionary says the translation is “bequeath”.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing
be replaced by any
expression.
What is your take on object exemplars?
Axel
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https
are easier to understand. It’s the opposite: Always
having to create a class to create an object is opposed to how humans think:
You don’t start with the abstract, you start with the specific. Self has
demonstrated very well that prototype-based inheritance can be very intuitive.
--
Dr. Axel
. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
” comparison).
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
: {
// methods
}
// class (ie, constructor) properties
};
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org
the property
name if it is the same as the current method name, but for now I always
explicitly include the name.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
exemplars were to become part of ES.next, we would not need class
literals.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org
appeared to create issues for
getter/setter property accesses:
var p = sup | {get foo() { return super} //is this the same as return
super.foo ???
};
Allen
On Oct 30, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
But we could have super(foo) as syntactic sugar
).
Axel
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
+)\s+(\w)+/g
A bit long, but reads nicely.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
{ ... }
const Employee = Person parenting { ... }
const Employee = Person above { ... }
const Employee = Person before { ... }
The above examples are almost English (well, to programmers, anyway).
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
to produce an instance.
I like object exemplar and function exemplar, because they are the more direct
descriptions.
On Oct 31, 2011, at 2:17 , Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Oct 30, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
Thanks. But it is
function exemplar versus object exemplar
@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es
to allow one to reimplement |super| (one use case that
comes to my mind is implementing multiple dispatch in JavaScript).
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
= 3DPoint.prototype.isPositive;
Entity.prototype.isPositive = function () {
return this.hasPoint this._isPositive();
};
Entity.prototype.hasPoint = false;
(new Entity).setPoint(1, 2, 3).isPositive(); // boom ? or super is bound to
Point ?
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home
overthinking classes?
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
*/): {
//constructor body
super(/*arguments to super constructor*/);
this.{
//per instance property definitions
};
},
prototype: {
}
//class (ie, constructor) properties
};
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
*/);
this.{
//per instance property definitions
};
}.{
//class (ie, constructor) properties
}.prototype{ // no dot after prototype
//instance properties defined on prototype
};
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog
that the same mechanism can be used for “subclassing”
and for creating an instance directly.
Also, I think having super would help a lot.
It seems to be a done deal for ES.next and is not tied to classes!
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog
are the one thing that would stay the same between all current
proposals!
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https
that makes it easy to create them.
Class literals and the various class definition patterns are all suitable
candidates.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss
Correct. My bad.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
rauschma.de
[Sent from a mobile device, please forgive brevity and typos]
On Oct 28, 2011, at 8:02, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
On Oct 27, 2011, at 3:08 AM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
+1. Where the spec is already almost pseudo-code
post]
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
. that could be used to test the
algorithms.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
, I would in general be in favor of ES6, because it
would help with implementing types (at the very least, subtyping would be
easier via | ).
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
, yet and you want to start now?
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
On Oct 25, 2011, at 8:15 , Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
I work on mobile browsers ... things are up to 1000 times slower there and
all tricks, as long as still readable, are welcome in my daily basis work.
Right, mobile is challenging.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
a toString method.
Allen
On Oct 3, 2011, at 2:28 AM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
Nice one!
It doesn’t even have to be Name.create() – new Object() works just fine. And
you can use switch with this pattern (I ES5-ified the code):
function Enum() {
let e
all these anonymous functions using the closure with
declarations for Symbol and Enum and export once at the end rather than
reference the exports object each time.
Yes, good idea, it’ll make things easier to read.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter
Ah, the array extras use pass the second argument on to
Function.prototype.call. That would indeed be faster. I thought bind() was
used, but that makes no sense.
On Oct 25, 2011, at 0:23 , Brendan Eich wrote:
On Oct 24, 2011, at 2:53 PM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
that = this:
- Your point
Please consider this.enum break all minifiers since enum is a reserved word,
I had to do this[enum] = {} at the end indeed.
Is enums better than enum?
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
objects that are its instances.
- A constructor inherits from another constructor.
- A class is a subclass of another class.
I wonder if the word class couldn’t be avoided (certainly not with class
literals).
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
, Counter);
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
.prototype.isPrototypeOf(constr2.prototype);
}
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
a helper for duck
typing.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
from another one. I’m just looking for the right words to
express what is happening in such a case.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss
.
A.prototype is a prototype of B. prototype (ugh).
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es
: I’ve implemented something similar to Selfish (using the method new was
inspired by it): https://github.com/rauschma/proto-js
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss
Can you elaborate? It seems like a cultural reference, but I don’t get it.
On Oct 24, 2011, at 0:18 , Brendan Eich wrote:
Does no one read RPG's fine Clause 3 of ECMA-262 these days?
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
of handling inheritance
in ES.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
) {
let inst = Object.create(this);
return inst.constructor(...args);
},
operatorInstanceof(lhs) {
return this.isPrototypeOf(lhs);
}
};
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
#set_literal_prototype_operator
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
programming language that does this (possibly Common Lisp with
its symbols, but I don’t know enough about them). It’s good to have them,
because they increase JavaScript’s expressiveness.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
Thanks! Nothing surprises me about Racket. Maybe when it *doesn’t* have a
feature. ;-)
On Oct 22, 2011, at 1:13 , Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de wrote:
Also, in general this sort of well known private method name hook is much
of identifying a concept and naming a
concept might make sense in large systems. But it obviously makes it more
difficult to edit source code (no more vi...).
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
and dicts.
Axel
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
of Object? I don’t think
there is a third alternative to those two.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es
#1 then you can just write
a library that provides Maps and other collections.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https
to, but it is conceptually very clear.
Axel
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
data domain and the program definition domain.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
= function (name, value) {
return Object.setProperty(name, value);
}
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org
:
Object.prototype.operator[]get = function (name) {
return Object.getProperty(this, name) ;
}
Object.prototype.operator[]set = function (name, value) {
return Object.setProperty(this, name, value);
}
Correct.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
, which aren’t too bad with class literals or one of the class definition
patterns.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https
True.
Yes, but an important point I was trying to make is that we already have two
competing forms of exemplars (three, if you include forms using
Object.create). Class literals add yet another exemplar form.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home
by chaining put() method calls.
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
twitter.com/rauschma
home: rauschma.de
blog: 2ality.com
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
801 - 900 of 1092 matches
Mail list logo
