>> I like the idea of replacing the method name “constructor” with something >> better, but “new” suggests instantiation *and* initialization to me. Is >> “init” a possibility? > > Who said anything about "replacing"? > > If we are trying to match or sugar the prototypal pattern, then whatever the > constructor name or keyword in the syntax, there must be for class C a > back-link C.prototype.constructor.
I only meant replacing in as far as the method that was previously called “constructor” is now called “new” in Allen’s example: let Point = class { x: 0, //not really needed unless defining an object exemplar y: 0, new(x,y) { this.x = x; this.y=y; } }; -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de home: rauschma.de twitter: twitter.com/rauschma blog: 2ality.com _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss