On Jun 25, 2011, at 11:13 AM, Axel Rauschmayer wrote: > I don’t know if this has been discussed, but I find the |super| work-around > provided by YUI and CoffeeScript (in the generated code) not that bad: > > ThisClass.__super__.foo.call(this, arg1, arg2);
I'm not sure what you mean. If we add 'super', surely we want more than the __super__ hack. We also want a callable expression 'super' in constructors, and a 'super.foo' form for method and other property accesses from subclass methods. We don't want people writing out .call by hand. > With ThisClass.__super__ pointing to SuperClass.prototype. The CoffeeScript compiler can lexically bind ThisClass and wire up __super__ with generated runtime helper code. That's all backstage of the CoffeeScript *language*, though. > As a completely static solution, one could maybe expand a super-call > super.bar(x, y); > to > __CurrentObject__.[[Prototype]].bar.call(this, x, y); > > On the other hand, I don’t know if a reference to __CurrentObject__ is ever > available for some kind of static expansion. Are you talking about |here| again, with a new name? There is no static counterpart other than the one Allen proposed, the object literal directly containing the method that uses 'super'. /be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
