I think that programmers of every prototype-based programming language find that they eventually need to develop a pattern for class-like abstractions. Here is the one for NewtonScript: http://waltersmith.us/newton/Class-based%20NewtonScript%20Programming.pdf …
-
-
In this context, prototypes break: If you create a prototype, this-binding occurs at the prototype deceleration site. Sure you can create a copy with some fields (functions, variables) replaces with new values, but the old fields will be stuck with the old this-binding.
-
Object oriented programming has a completely clear purely functional subset, but it’s only sensible with the class abstraction. There’s no way to capture prototypes without explicit this-plumbing at every call site.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.