On Sep 17, 2014, at 6:40, "Kevin Smith"
<zenpars...@gmail.com<mailto:zenpars...@gmail.com>> wrote:
constructor(x, y) {
if (new^)
this = new super(x);
else
super.constructor(x);
this.y = y;
}
The point here is that the purpose of the constructor method is not only
allocation, but also (and primarily) initialisation.
Yes - you are right. And I think we can safely assume that users will refuse
to write such boilerplate.
That seems fine. Enabling different behaviour for called vs. constructed should
only be used to explain the builtins; user code should not do so themselves. So
it makes sense to me that those trying to do that would get "punished" with
having to type more.
The more pressing ergonomic question is whether `this = new super(...)` is too
much. I think it's fine, especially in comparison to `Base.call(this, ...)`.
(For those counting characters, the score comes down to how long your
superclass name is, and I'd wager most are longer than the five characters
required for the new syntax to start winning.)
I'll have to consider things for a bit before replying to the larger point.
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org<mailto: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
