Re: Analysis of property visibility, immutability, a nd cloning proposals

On Tue, Dec 29, 2020, at 2:26 AM, Marc wrote: > > On 28.12.20 21:23, Larry Garfield wrote: > > There's been a number of discussions of late around property visibility and how to > > make objects more immutable. Since it seems to have been well-received in the past, I decided to do > > a complete analysis and context of the various things that have been floated about recently. > > > > The full writeup is here: > > > > > > https://peakd.com/hive-168588/@crell/object-properties-and-immutability > > > > I hope it proves stimulating, at least of discussion and not naps. > > > > Thanks for the nice write up Larry! > > Is there a reason you didn't mention the proposal for immutable classes? > (probably because it never went into a final RFC) > > https://externals.io/message/94913#94913 > > https://externals.io/message/79180#79180 Two main reasons: 1) It's not been discussed recently (see how old the dates are on those messages), so I wasn't thinking about it. 2) An immutable class would in all practicality be the same as a class where all the properties are initonly (or writeonce, but that was already rejected). So any arguments for/against initonly apply in aggregate to an immutable class. --Larry Garfield