{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/144","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-class-fields","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/144/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/144/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/144/events","html_url":"https://github.com/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/144","id":369869596,"node_id":"MDU6SXNzdWUzNjk4Njk1OTY=","number":144,"title":"Can we take a step back?","user":{"login":"rdking","id":2289634,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjIyODk2MzQ=","avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/2289634?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/rdking","html_url":"https://github.com/rdking","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rdking/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rdking/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rdking/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rdking/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rdking/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rdking/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rdking/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rdking/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/rdking/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":138,"created_at":"2018-10-14T05:32:18Z","updated_at":"2018-10-19T22:21:55Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"NONE","body":"When there is so much feedback on this proposal from those who are aware and choose to speak at all and from members of the TC39 board itself that there are several things wrong with this proposal that make it a less than adequate solution to the problem of adding data privacy to ES, isn't that a good enough indication that it may be time to step back and re-think?\r\n\r\nHow about, instead of trying to push through with class-fields, we come up with \"class properties\" instead? The general idea is simple. Objects have properties. Functions are objects. Classes are functions with a prototype object. Therefore classes should support declaring properties for both its function and its prototype.\r\n\r\nCan we solve and add this to the language first, separately from all other concerns? No private, no protected or other intermediate. Just ordinary public and static properties. I'm beginning to come to the impression that until this much is solved, the path forward for a reasonably acceptable, non-future path blocking proposal won't easily reveal itself. Maybe we're trying to take too big of a jump all at once."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/comments/431516186","html_url":"https://github.com/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/144#issuecomment-431516186","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/144","id":431516186,"node_id":"MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQzMTUxNjE4Ng==","user":{"login":"ljharb","id":45469,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjQ1NDY5","avatar_url":"https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/45469?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/ljharb","html_url":"https://github.com/ljharb","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ljharb/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ljharb/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ljharb/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ljharb/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ljharb/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ljharb/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ljharb/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ljharb/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ljharb/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-10-19T22:21:55Z","updated_at":"2018-10-19T22:21:55Z","author_association":"MEMBER","body":"@rdking `Object.setPrototypeOf(function () {}, null)` works just fine? <sub>(I had to run `function f() {} console.log(Object.getPrototypeOf(f) === Function.prototype); Object.setPrototypeOf(f, null); console.log(Object.getPrototypeOf(f) === Function.prototype)` in the dev console to get the output i wanted, but there you go)</sub>."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"ljharb"}}