Hard or soft private?
-
-
-
Replying to @littledan @wycats
That's not the JS way, if there is a JS way; does it deserve the most convenient syntax?
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @BrendanEich
if you want soft private, say so. There's certainly people on TC39 willing to argue for it with enough critical mass.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
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 @BrendanEich
ppl in favor of short soft less willing to block. Result: hard private wins. cmte pathology? Yes, according to Good/Bad/Ugly.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wycats @BrendanEich
bad thing committee ignores people's opinion https://github.com/tc39/proposal-private-fields/issues/14 …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I discussed that thread.
@awbjs said there was a big effort to make that work, but impossible.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @littledan @chicoxyzzy and
I raised the possibility that we drop the proposal, as some suggested, but TC39 decided to proceed
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I believe that the current status is: open to considering soft-private based on data before Stg3
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.