I'm happy to help in any way I can, wherever :) just let me know
-
-
Replying to @AdamRackis @wycats and
This use case sounds pretty valid. Wanna file a bug at https://github.com/littledan/proposal-unified-class-features/issues … to track removal of the unnecessary check?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @littledan @wycats and
Honestly I'm not sure I understand what you're asking me to post. That foo=Class => class X{ } should validly return X for
@foo class{} ?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdamRackis @wycats and
Well, that still wouldn't work--compatibility with existing decorators (on the decorator implementer side) isn't a goal. Should it be?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @littledan @AdamRackis and
I'm suggesting, we could remove the check that the class is the subclass of the other class, but still leave it based on the finisher.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @littledan @wycats and
Dan summed it up best, before: it would be ideal if decorators "just worked" with existing HoCs out in the wild.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AdamRackis @wycats and
I don't see a good way to make the imperative decorator design work well with things like field declarations
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @littledan @AdamRackis and
We'd have to add crazy metaprogramming that risks making the whole world slower. I don't want to go down that path; ES6 was hard enough.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @littledan @wycats and
As Yehuda said, these use cases already supported w/ constructor replacement in finalizer (iirc). This is just about adding a syntactic 1/
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdamRackis @littledan and
shortcut that achieves the same thing, but by returning the new ctor right from the decorator, instead of the object currently spec'd.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@littledan I think I understand what the design space is here. Let's do a call to hash it out. (I've had some productive private convos)
-
-
Replying to @wycats @AdamRackis and
The thing people want is not the same as what they need. We may not be able to do it either, but I'm not sure.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - 1 more reply
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.