On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Sean Eagan <seaneag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.com> wrote: >> On Jun 22, 2011, at 6:48 AM, Sean Eagan wrote: >> >>> I don't think we need any "safety check" when assigning a method or >>> accessor getter or setter that uses super to an object. The concept >>> of "super" seems to be a relative one, >> >> That is what we are arguing about. It's not a conclusion we all share. > > In ES, functions are first class objects not owned by any one object, > an "absolute" super breaks this.
I agree that dynamic "this" but static "super" seems odd but maybe symmetry with "this" is not desired. Maybe we should have static "super" and be looking for symmetry with a static "self". Peter _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
