On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
<allen at wirfs-brock.com>wrote:

>
> On Dec 27, 2013, at 7:27 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:
> ...
>
> I thought Allen designed things so
>
>  class C {}
>
> differed from
>
>  class C extends Object {}
>
> so as in the first case to avoid (a) super calling Object and making a
> useless newborn; (b) C inheriting class-side properties from Object.
>
>
> Exactly, see step 7 of
> http://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-runtime-semantics-classdefinitionevaluation
>
>
> Allen
>


I think the differences should include to making calls to super() illegal
when 'extends' is absent:
   class C { constructor(url) {super(url);}}   // legal, I expected illegal.
jjb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20131228/07bf5306/attachment.html>

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>wrote:

> Exactly, see step 7 of
> http://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-runtime-semantics-classdefinitionevaluation


I think the differences should include to making calls to super() illegal
when 'extends' is absent:

```js
class C { constructor(url) {super(url);}}   // legal, I expected illegal.
```