Hey guys,
First posting to this mailing list. I'm defining a few ES6 features as
sweet.js macros so existing projects can easily leverage them. I also
happen to think macros are a big deal for JS and this is how future
extensions should be defined... (at least ones that are mostly
syntactic) My
Hi James.
Take a look here:
https://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-runtime-semantics-makesuperreference-propertykey-strict
.
I think that should help you.
- Jonathan Barronville
On December 9, 2013 at 10:54:54 AM, James Long (longs...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hey guys,
First
super is lexically scoped, just like this to the closest enclosing function
that defines it. All function definition forms except for arrow functions
introduce new this/super bindings so we can just stay that this/super binds
according to the closest enclosing non-arrow function definition.
So essentially super is an alias for `Object.getPrototypeOf(this)` ?
I'm trying to interpret the spec but I'm somewhat new to the terms it
uses. Not exactly sure home is, but I'm sure it's defined elsewhere
in there so I'll keep digging into it.
- James
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Allen
On Dec 9, 2013, at 8:46 AM, James Long wrote:
So essentially super is an alias for `Object.getPrototypeOf(this)` ?
I'm trying to interpret the spec but I'm somewhat new to the terms it
uses. Not exactly sure home is, but I'm sure it's defined elsewhere
in there so I'll keep digging into it.
OnMon, Dec 9, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
super is lexically scoped
This is true.
James Long wrote:
So essentially super is an alias for `Object.getPrototypeOf(this)` ?
But |this| is not lexically scoped, so your question's answer must be no.
I read Allen's email wrong, thought it implied `this` was lexically
scoped (which I know is not true. very little sleep at an airport...).
I'll keep digging through the spec, but if someone has a quick example
what ES5 code I could compile to for roughly the same semantics, that
would be helpful.
You could also check the output of Traceur and TypeScript. I don't know how
close either of them are to implementing the exact semantics of ES6
classes, but I'm sure it'll be helpful in any case.
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 6:28 PM, James Long longs...@gmail.com wrote:
I read Allen's email wrong,
`super.foo(x)` is equivalent to
```js
Object.getPrototypeOf(me.[[HomeObject]]).foo.call(this, x);
```
(where `me` refers to the current function)
On Dec 9, 2013, at 18:28 , James Long longs...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll keep digging through the spec, but if someone has a quick example
what ES5
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Till Schneidereit t...@tillschneidereit.net
wrote:
You could also check the output of Traceur and TypeScript. I don't know how
close either of them are to implementing the exact semantics of ES6 classes,
but I'm sure it'll be helpful in any case.
Yup. See
TS is known to get this wrong in the name of simplicity.
Traceur gets it right inside class bodies. We do not support toMethod (not
even sure if this is doable).
https://github.com/google/traceur-compiler/blob/master/test/feature/Classes/SuperChangeProto.js
http://goo.gl/0kV4ts
On Mon, Dec
If you have an inner function that calls `super`, Traceur keeps track
of the outer this and makes sure to call it with that. TypeScript
does not do this. Is this correct?
```
class Bar extends Foo {
nestedFunction() {
function run() {
return super.getX();
}
super is lexically bound.
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 7:39 PM, James Long longs...@gmail.com wrote:
If you have an inner function that calls `super`, Traceur keeps track
of the outer this and makes sure to call it with that. TypeScript
does not do this. Is this correct?
TypeScript, also does not
13 matches
Mail list logo
