On Wed, Jul 7, 2021, at 10:33 PM, Brent Roose wrote:
> > The property accessor RFC (which didn't get to a vote) discussed this, and
> > specifically proposed making properties part of the interface for...
> > basically all the reasons given here.
> >
>
> I thought the RFC didn't go to vote
Le 07/07/2021 à 23:16, Larry Garfield a écrit :
The property accessor RFC (which didn't get to a vote) discussed this, and
specifically proposed making properties part of the interface for... basically
all the reasons given here.
My preference would be to add property accessors in 8.2 (at
> On 7 Jul 2021, at 23:16, Larry Garfield wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2021, at 7:32 AM, Brent Roose wrote:
>> Hi internals
>>
>> With the readonly properties RFC almost certainly accepted, I'd like to
>> discuss an idea that's slightly related to them.
>>
>> One of the problems that readonly
On Wed, Jul 7, 2021, at 7:32 AM, Brent Roose wrote:
> Hi internals
>
> With the readonly properties RFC almost certainly accepted, I'd like to
> discuss an idea that's slightly related to them.
>
> One of the problems that readonly properties solve is that they reduce
> the overhead of writing
Hi internals
With the readonly properties RFC almost certainly accepted, I'd like to discuss
an idea that's slightly related to them.
One of the problems that readonly properties solve is that they reduce the
overhead of writing getters and setters. This is especially noticeable in
objects
Le 07/07/2021 à 14:32, Brent Roose a écrit :
Hi internals
With the readonly properties RFC almost certainly accepted, I'd like to discuss
an idea that's slightly related to them.
One of the problems that readonly properties solve is that they reduce the
overhead of writing getters and
