> > One thing I'm not yet sure about is the declaration. Currently it works > > like this: > > > > this.name: string > > this.gender: Gender > > > > Notice that there is no "var" keyword. It's not needed to recognize the > > declaration. I can't think of a good reason to add "var" here, other > > than that a declaration would be expected to always have "var". Well, I > > don't have that expectation. > > This following currently defines a field and is, without context, > indistinguishable from any other assignment. Is that intended?
With "var" it's indistinguishable from another declaration, I don't think it matters much that it looks like an assignment otherwise. > this.name = "Somebody" > > As methods still require :def I think it would be more consistent to not > special case field declarations and still require the :var. True, for methods ":def" is used like elsewhere. I'm not sure if using ":var" for variables should be considered more consistent. > For class members most languages use the "static" keyword. It's a bit > > of a weird word, but I suppose most people are used to it, and I can't > > find a popular language that has a good alternative. > > > > If we leave out "var" for object members, I suppose we should also leave > > it out for class members. We then get: > > > > static oneClassMember: number > > static twoClassMember: string > > > > I think this looks fine. Any objections? > > It seems from the documentation that static fields can be referenced as > bare identifiers? This feels a bit unexpected to me given that instance > fields are always qualified. Static fields (class members) are totally different from object members. I have always found it confusing, in many languages it's hard to tell them apart, especially if the declaration is further away. Always using "this" for object members helps a lot for this. I would not know what to use for class members. The only thing I have seen is using the class name, which can be long (and gets tricky when using inheritance). I believe most languages access class members directly, without a prefix. We have already dropped the "s:" prefix for using script-local variables. Using class members is a bit similar to that. -- We learn from our mistakes. Politicians don't make mistakes. /// Bram Moolenaar -- b...@moolenaar.net -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ /// \\\ \\\ sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ /// \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org /// -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/20221225150208.1227A1C0AA3%40moolenaar.net.
