Good point, but
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:private_name_objects
still has that visibility flag as an "open issue".
We need to settle this, sooner is better ;-).
/be
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Brandon Benvie
<bran...@brandonbenvie.com> wrote:
Errr that only applies to private properties that manifest in public
results, as @construct and @call were described. In other cases the private
name I would guess is simply not enforceable because there's no direct link
between the private property and the outside world that has to be enforced.
The shows a flaw of linking a private property with a predictable observable
result.
The private name proposal has the ability to create ordinary unique
names (same basic functionality, but enumerable and passed directly to
proxies), right? Obviously all the names used in the standard library
should be merely unique, not private, as you're not attempting to hide
anything, just prevent accidental name clashes.
~TJ
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
