Hey Alex, et al., I'm inclined to agree with Jeff on this point, so I hope there's a way of making the syntax sweeter.
> Yes, the very first version I wrote did in fact do that. I changed it > on the advice of some friends after they looked at the syntax. Do you remember what offended your friends? The name of the 'self' parameter is completely flexible, so that much can be left up to individual style. I happen to like the following (although I understand the self-as-Class idiom derives from Ruby): var Person = Class.create(function(Person) { Person.classMethod = function() {...}; ... }) Anyway, to each his own. I'm guessing your friends balked at the self.prototype.instanceMethod = function() {...} syntax. That bit can be improved, I think. If you use the closure as a constructor for the prototype object of the new class, then you can set instance properties by referring to 'this': var Person = Class.create(function(self) { self.classMethod = function() {...}; this.instanceMethod = function() {...}; }) This also eliminates the need to return anything from the closure. If there's any interest in this approach, I can cook up a diff. Ben --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---