Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #26532
| From | John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
| Subject | Re: Can somebody explain this to me |
| Date | 2015-01-10 16:58 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <lgm2ba59k42e89i54m7i6a2o6f8c6num8j@4ax.com> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <1761561.NWXpXnK3hu@PointedEars.de> <4ikqaa9iqmr7jd2qtiqhbsv47frcvjq12t@4ax.com> <1484912.4aj6z3n5JQ@PointedEars.de> <7dd0badq67nid10hcrgs0l2f5r7td12jbo@4ax.com> <2325067.SlJVB63eap@PointedEars.de> |
On Fri, 09 Jan 2015 22:11:48 +0100, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote: >John Harris wrote: > >> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> John Harris wrote: >>>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>>>> John Harris wrote: <snip> >> It's a funny constructor that doesn't create equivalent objects. > >Quite normal in ECMAScript, though. <snip> >> (Same property names, same prototype chain). > >Not necessarily. <snip> >> In your words, the created objects have something in common. > >Not necessarily. All right, I'll extend my words : If that's what the programmer wants then in your words the created objects have something in common. >> If the program goes on to make arbitrary changes to the properties >> held then obviously the program is not taking advantage of their >> initial equivalence, and so not treating them as members of a class. > >I have already pointed out that the caller need not modify the constructed >objects for differences between the instances. <snip> All right, the constructor can also play games when the caller has delegated part of the job to the constructor. >> I *never* refer to a constructor as a "class". > >Then you should not have objected in the first place because that was the >question at hand. No it wasn't. You objected to the word 'class' in the phrase 'class definition'. >> A class is a class of objects, not their constructor function(s), nor >> their definition (explicit or implicit). > >But I followed up on an OP that claimed something else. You objected to >what I wrote there. <snip> What do you mean? >>>I think that sufficient >>>arguments, authoritative evidence indeed, has been presented by more than >>>one person here to conclude that one should not. >> >>>So everyone?s life ? not least that of newcomers seeking clarity here ? >>>would be easier if you *please* stop doing that. >> >> From the earliest JavaScript onward the language(s) have had all the >> facilities needed to implement classes. > >Doubtful; you will have to prove that. And which kind of classes? C++’s? >Java’s? Something else’s? <snip> Look at the (draft) specification for ES6 class declarations and ask yourself which features the compiler must use that aren't in ES2 to ES5.1. >I can certainly agree that it is possible to use JavaScript, all major >ECMAScript implementations really, to implement some features of class-based >inheritance; I am doing that myself. > >But what matters is: It/they did not *have* classes until now (if we ignore >the ECMAScript Edition 4 draft and its implementations). The authoritative >documentation of the respective programming language does not feature that >term; in fact, it explicitly says that there are no classes in either >language, and rightly so. To claim otherwise is misleading. It is you who >made the claim, and *that* was to which I, among others, objected. If people can understand that ES2 to ES5.1 contain all the facilities needed to implement classes then they will be at an advantage when ES6 arrives. They will understand that in ES6 the compiler does the work for you. They will not be confused by what is no doubt going to be a lot of misleading writing, some of it pure mysticism. John
Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Can somebody explain this to me "Tony Johansson" <johansson.andersson@telia.com> - 2015-01-06 00:48 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-06 01:40 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-06 16:01 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-06 17:26 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-07 00:45 -0200
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-07 04:35 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2015-01-07 16:15 -0200
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-07 21:20 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-01-08 00:00 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-08 00:09 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-01-08 10:53 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-08 16:17 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-01-08 17:04 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-08 19:02 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-07 15:37 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-07 17:01 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-08 10:43 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-08 13:16 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-08 16:43 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-09 20:16 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-09 22:11 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-10 16:58 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-11 12:41 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-12 15:46 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-12 18:01 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-13 10:38 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-14 16:06 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2015-01-21 13:00 -0800
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-21 20:53 -0200
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-22 11:43 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2015-01-22 10:20 -0200
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-23 19:42 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-28 18:14 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-22 11:39 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-22 13:27 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-23 14:36 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 08:51 -0800
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-23 23:17 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-24 16:42 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 15:35 -0800
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-25 11:08 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-01-26 08:33 -0800
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-27 14:10 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-28 15:50 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-28 18:26 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-29 10:29 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-31 00:37 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-01-28 13:30 -0800
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-01-28 22:40 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-29 10:32 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-29 10:23 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-29 11:04 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-01-26 08:21 -0800
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2015-01-26 11:10 -0800
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 06:36 -0800
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-06 17:34 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-06 19:03 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-07 15:07 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-07 16:41 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-07 17:22 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-08 10:36 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-08 13:36 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-08 17:54 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-08 19:48 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-08 22:09 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2015-01-08 18:22 -0200
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-08 22:13 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-08 22:25 +0100
Re: Can somebody explain this to me John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-08 10:25 +0000
Re: Can somebody explain this to me "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-01-08 11:33 +0100
csiph-web