> It's a matter of opinion. UML thinks that <| points is pointing in the > "right" direction (towards the more general object).
I thought about the [[Prototype]] property pointing from the “prototypee” to the prototype. And of the way prototype (property lookup) chains go from prototypees to prototypes. > However, a lot of people think about inheritance as methods flowing > from/provided by the super thing to the sub thing. That perspective is more > in alignment with -> OK, as in “prototype of”. > At this stage, choice of a symbol seems to be most about what will cause the > lesser about of opposition based solely upon the symbol choice. Some people > seem to really hate <|. If there a reasonable alternatives that don't > generate the same sort of negative response then it is worth considering them. Agreed. At this point, I’ll be fine with any notation, as long as we eventually have this operator. I’m normally wary of grawlixification, but this is one case where (IMO) something grawlixy works well. So far any proposal I have seen has been met with strong opposition. How does one resolve such stalemates? Popular vote? But design by the people is usually even worse than design be committee – Fred Brooks argues that good design is best decided by a single person (two, if one of them is dominant). A TC39 vote? A BDFL decree? -- 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
