Mascara: ECMAScript 6 -> JavaScript translator - Comments

Olav Junker Kjær comments on "If a feature is not documented, it does not exist"

Hi AJG!
I am so sorry I haven't noticed you question before now! Don't know how I missed it.
Mascara does support packages, it is just not very well documented yet. I will write a new blog post tomorrow show how to do what you want.

AJG comments on "If a feature is not documented, it does not exist"

Are packages implemented? The link redirects to the main documentation page, which leads me to think they aren't. Will they be, soon? I think they are greatly needed in order to write modular code. Is there currently any way to do something like:

class Foo::Bar { ... }

var bar = new Foo::Bar;

In other words, is there any way to place classes within namespaces or packages?

Thanks!

anon comments on Mascara 1.2 - With interfaces

Any chance of visibility modifiers? Creating closures for this purpose is a mess, I would use Mascara if they just added: private var x so I could avoid the hacky-wacky way this is achieved using closures and self invoking functions..yuck!

Olav comments on Getters and setters

Hi enefekt. Mascara does not support E4X. However if there is interest, I will consider adding support for it. I have been a bit doubtful about how big the demand for E4X is these days, where it seem JSON is used more and more in place of XML in AJAX-apps. However if there is demand and use cases for it, I will seriously look into it.

(For the un-initiated: E4X is extensions that allow XML literals in JavaScript and special syntax for selecting attributes and child elements from elements. See eg, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript_for_XML The objective is to make it more straightforward to work with XML.)

enefekt comments on Getters and setters

Does mascara support e4x?

enefekt comments on Mascara 1.2 - With interfaces

This tool looks so rad. I hope to actually try and use it soon.
Is there a larger development effort using Mascara (for some corp work) or is the community interest picking up steam?

Olav Junker Kjær comments on Mascara 1.0 Released

@Matthias: Thank you :-)

Matthias Miller comments on Mascara 1.0 Released

Congratulations!

Olav Junker Kjær comments on Mascara 1.0 Released

Hi Dangoor, and thank you!

Harmony is the current code word for the version which will come after 3.1. But I suspect it will still get the official name ECMAScript 4.0 when released, since it will still be a significant upgrade to ECMAScript 3.

However, as you say, it will be scaled back compared to the earlier plans for version 4.0. What was known as ES4 will probably be more like ES5 or ES6.

I think it is a good thing that the working group have decided on a more incremental approach. As you say, it makes it more realistic that it will actually get implemented.

It also means that Mascara is more than one generation ahead of the future ;-)

Kevin Dangoor comments on Mascara 1.0 Released

Congrats on the release! This is a neat piece of work.

One correction, ECMAScript 4 and ECMAScript Harmony are not really the same thing. ES4 is more-or-less dead. ES-Harmony is the ES version that will come after 3.1. From everything I've heard (and I know a couple of folks in the working group), Harmony is very scaled back from ES4. The plus side is that Harmony will actually come to exist... it's just unlikely to do as much as what you've done with Mascara.