Message from JavaScript discussions
June 2017
— I would like to see it :)
The Dev's groups,
Rules:
- Only English
- No Spam
- Related to group topic
JavaScript
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEEU-CGtxqPvZzRXug
Python
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEI6mgRpU8Ook_LZiQ
Java
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEHS8_F0yoL401QNuQ
PHP
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEI7auDV7fUlhQpKbw
C/C++
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAD_cJVeMzHBQMtxB5w
Android
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEFs51MT1z2bWDhZBQ
iOS/Swift
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEHGFQmBITbYfSSmrA
Design
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEKREgzW3ypwIjRwpQ
Linux
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEJIlclCRzYqrMYwNQ
— Neat
— Amaze, cheers bud
— Private by scope?
— This is what I need.
— Correct
— I actually don't usually use typical constructors with new
and the prototype chain, but rather factories which can do the same chaining while supporting that.
— Then, using the revealing module pattern, I also avoid duplicating functions. So this is one unusual instance where I tried to use regular "classes"
— I can easily supply constructor thunks though, as part of the revealed interface, which is what I usually do when revealing modules
— If so you can allow prototype methods to access the same private members through weakmap
— Hm, TRGWII I went to implement using charcodes in that stringset and ran into some... interesting roadblock