Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript
Subject: Re: Can somebody explain this to me
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 18:01:51 +0100
Organization: PointedEars Software (PES)
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <7682169.ZKkCekDsxD@PointedEars.de>
References: <m8f7s7$lcv$1@dont-email.me> <1590597.KOVAYohEvS@PointedEars.de> <qj1oaahmnp3r6j45b27sm5ujsfhqu4igv6@4ax.com> <1761561.NWXpXnK3hu@PointedEars.de> <4ikqaa9iqmr7jd2qtiqhbsv47frcvjq12t@4ax.com> <1484912.4aj6z3n5JQ@PointedEars.de> <7dd0badq67nid10hcrgs0l2f5r7td12jbo@4ax.com> <2325067.SlJVB63eap@PointedEars.de> <lgm2ba59k42e89i54m7i6a2o6f8c6num8j@4ax.com> <3995038.SQAsCjjxyy@PointedEars.de> <apq7ba5hmtq8qvginprunddugeep0qrpq6@4ax.com>
Reply-To: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <cljs@PointedEars.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit
X-Trace: solani.org 1421082134 11815 eJwFwYEBwCAIA7CXZKVFzkHQ/09YQsjU4aKcj69aSIdq0NsLdy6FlXGPw7jgOJExNmcvfv0DFkoQnQ== (12 Jan 2015 17:02:14 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.solani.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 17:02:14 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: KNode/4.14.2
X-User-ID: eJwNycEBADEEBMCWELuhHY7+S8jNd3Co7OsEHYuNjuw8lE9UZMr8DzGLzErjqgzgR6KM9C20jy9G73Sq5QMbAhQd
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Go0j/X+F33VuFqqEeYv7EyjCIfg=
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: eJwNyrEBACAIA7CbQFvkHED4/wTdMgSLwrJNcGMwmXpHvRouPMwVQJV9GCOy/R/0QDlHBPoALcwRcQ==
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:26558

John Harris wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>   <snip>
>>> If people can understand that ES2 to ES5.1 contain all the facilities
>>> needed to implement classes
>> Your proof of that is pending.
> 
> We can only go by the current draft of the ES6 standard, dated 2014
> Dec 24 at the time of writing. Obviously, it could be totally
> different when the candidate standard is approved. […]

The proof that is required of you is that “ES2 to ES5.1” (where you did not 
consider the ES4 draft that does have classes, and for a still unexplained 
reason excluded ES1) “contain all the facilities needed to implement 
classes”.  Because *that* is what you claimed.

In order to provide that proof you would need to pick at least one real-
world flavor of class-based inheritance and then show that *all* of its 
features can be implemented with a conforming implementation of “ES2 to 
ES5.1” (excluding the ES4 draft).  You would then have proven that it is 
possible to *fully* implement all the *selected* flavors of class-based 
inheritance with the aforementioned ECMAScript implementations.

Can you do that?

Only *after* you have done that it makes sense to discuss whether your 
second claim, that using the term “class” as you prefer to use it *now* is 
going to help with using ES6’s classes (as they are currently specified in 
the working draft), has any basis in reality.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.