On Dec 21, 2010, at 10:41 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote: > Again you seem to be confusing the "inherited soft fields" proposal with > the *separate* proposal on desugaring the private name syntax to inherited > soft fields.
I think I may have been misunderstanding what Mark was actually proposing/advocating, then. I'm happy to be disabused of my mis-reading. But on re-reading, I still can't quite make sense of the "Can we subsume Names?" section. There are two syntactic components to the private names proposal: (1) the bracket-notation is generalized to recognize private name values to look for private properties (2) the dot-notation and colon-notation are generalized to use private names when their property name is bound by a |private| declaration But the "Can we subsume Names?" subsection seems to mix these two cases up. To match up with (1), you'd need to interpret *all* bracket notation as a potential lookup of a soft field, i.e. something like: e1[e2] ~~> let (t1 = e1, t2 = e2) { => t2 instanceof SoftField ? t2.get(t1) : t1[t2] } (where the rewritten brackets are the "true" brackets, i.e., not re-desugared). Dave _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss