Re: [webcomponents]: Declarative Custom Elements Take Umpteen, The Karate Kid Edition

And to be clear, we also have to be able to do this (not that anybody said
anything to the contrary)

<element ...>
  <script src="..."></script>
</element>

If there is more than once <script>, I assume the last one 'wins'?


On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com> wrote:

> So, I don't love the extra punctuation, but there are other good things
> here. We do away with duplication of tag name and the magic
> [something].register call.
>
> Presumably I can still set up private members in a closure, like this (?):
>
> <script>
>   var privateStack = [];
>   (class XFoo: HTMLElement { readyCallback() { privateStack.push(...); }
> });
> </script>
>
> The last critical bit is some way to access our <element>. We could have
> another callback which is essentially a static, called once per <element>
> to allow access to the <element> itself, but I don't know where we'd put it
> other than on the prototype itself.
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Daniel Buchner <daniel@mozilla.com>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> <element name="foo-bar">
>>>>    ...
>>>>    <script>
>>>>        class FooBar {
>>>>            ...
>>>>        };
>>>>    </script>
>>>> </element>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is it then possible to explicitly return the class after definition? I'm
>>> asking because <script> return value is something I was not aware of.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, by wrapping it in parenthesis. The spec
>> http://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-13.5 seems to
>> say that (class X { }) returns X but class X { } at the top level returns
>> undefined.
>>
>> Thankfully it's not too gross, you'd just have:
>>
>> <script>
>> (class MyCustomWidget : HTMLElement {
>>   // ...
>> })
>> </script>
>>
>> ...   ...
>>>    <script>
>>>        class FooBar {
>>>            ...
>>>        };
>>>
>>>        return FooBar;
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> "return" isn't valid in the top level execution block which sucks. It
>> would nice if we relaxed that restriction and allowed a return up there.
>>
>> - E
>>
>>
>