On Sep 3, 2015, at 2:30 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
>> \
>
> Global script is global, though. I don't see how you can have
>
> <script>
> class Widget {...}
> </script>
> ...
> <script>
> let w = new Widget();
> ...
> </script>
>
> fail for want of an extra step to export Widget from the first script and
> import it into the second. Modules, sure, but scripts aren't modules.
Yes, that was the objection. But a (reasonable?) workaround might have been:
<script>
var Widget = class {...}
</script>
>
> Anyway, we indeed seek consensus and give up our favorites, saving them for
> told-you-so moments later ;-).
>
>> but consensus on something was necessary in order to have publish a standard.
>
> Yep. But this is es-discuss, so fair to discuss (and rehash every year :-P),
> and what's more: implementor feedback is way overdue. That's what Jason is
> bringing to us, we need to attend to it.
>
> ES6 took a lot of risk running ahead of any implementor. Last time, we
> promise, eh?
Fingers crossed. Implementors have to step-up and take the risk of
implementing "big" features before final standardization. We seem to be making
some progress there with async functions and simd.
Alen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
