if you want soft private, say so. There's certainly people on TC39 willing to argue for it with enough critical mass.
-
-
Replying to @wycats
I never said what I wanted, thanks for asking! I want soft private to get the short syntax.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @BrendanEich
me too, but it's a heavy, heavy lift. Multiple people willing to block in favor of hard-private getting short syntax.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wycats
On what basis in rational argumentation and cowpath paving principle of design?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrendanEich
on the argument that 'hard private is better' for various (commendable enough) ideological reasons.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
Those are usually from non-JS or anti-JS ideologues. I meant something based on cowpaths + induction. Deduction from alien axioms--.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrendanEich
There are roughly zero arguments from cowpaths or induction from JS. All "first principles" arguments.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats @BrendanEich
To confirm my interpretation... There's no controversy about the need for hard private, right? Just which is "default".
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I have need for hard private but don't care about the syntax. I'd even use WeakMap if I trusted the impl to be fast.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @sebmarkbage @BrendanEich3 replies 3 retweets 5 likes
decorator names are illustrative only.
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.