> it becomes awkward in javascript when time comes
> around to serializing/reconstructing the custom array-type
To be honest, I've found that overriding `toJSON()` and providing some
static helpers for your `JSON.parse()` reviver lead to pretty expressive
(de)serializability:
class MySerializable
it may be standard-operating-procedure to sub-class builtin arrays in
other languages. but it becomes awkward in javascript when time comes
around to serializing/reconstructing the custom array-type while
baton-passing it around frontend<->backend<->database via JSON.
On 11/3/17, Andrea Giammarch
I agree with everything else you said but since you mentioned the word
"misinformed" I'd like to improve this misleading sentence:
> It's 99% sugar over the existing prototype-based model
This has been one of the most misunderstood and undertaken parts of ES6.
Classes are *not* just sugar, think
Honestly, this entire thread reads as partially misinformed,
borderline trollbait. These kinds of questions and thoughts should
really be asked directly (and a bit more respectfully) to TC39
representatives and/or put in blog posts wherever. es-discuss is
primarily about language design, and althou
-Original Message-
From: Claude Petit [mailto:p...@webmail.us]
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2017 4:24 PM
To: 'kai zhu' ; 'es-discuss'
Subject: RE: javascript vision thing
For mostly real OOP under JS, please see my project (doodad-js). But I can't
warranty its future without a custom l
5 matches
Mail list logo
