Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
Below...
Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.org> wrote:
> Allen Wirfs-Brock <mailto:al...@wirfs-brock.com>
> January 23, 2012 8:43 AM
> On Jan 22, 2012, at 7:36 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>
?..
>
> const getIterator = Iterator.getIterator;
> myCoolObject.prototype.@getIterator = function() {...}
Why wouldn't myCoolObject.prototype[iterator.getIterator] work?
/be
It would, for now. But, I think you gave the reason for avoiding this
pattern in another reply. If we ever want to adopt my Reformed Object
Model proposal then we should avoid using [ ] for private name property
access. lt would actually still work fine for objects with default [ ]
behavior but not for collection objects that redefine [ ] access.
Losing generic [] as a way to access all "native" properties of the
object is big price. What about half-way: modify object reformation to
have "native []" and "logical []" in parallel.
You can use
x.foo
x["foo"]
x.["foo"]
syntaxes (and x.@priv, too), and if you define the latter as "native
property access", for the time being equivalent to [], but later [] can
be redefined (or vice versa, but it seems .[] is more akin to . and .@
and [] seems better for "logical" element access), you've got the
collection [] but don't lose the object-structural [].
Allen
Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
