Issues

• Please Don't Do That.

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#331 · Filter by author LuciformResearch opened on Jun 5, 2021
  8

• Proxy nested inside of the Prototype Chain

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#330 · Filter by author wentout opened on Apr 19, 2021
  2

• Statement of our opinions on class fields and its related package of proposals

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#329 · Filter by author zeldajay opened on Apr 19, 2021
  2

• Why are #private fields not source-positional?

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#328 · Filter by author trusktr opened on Apr 16, 2021
  22

• Properties without initializers can create some headache in "real-world" scenarios.

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#323 · Filter by author dfahlander opened on Oct 1, 2020
  14

• [[Define]] semantics necessitate workarounds

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#322 · Filter by author trusktr opened on Sep 30, 2020
  7

• Class composition

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#319 · Filter by author rowaasr13 opened on Sep 2, 2020
  3

• Support for privates in object literals?

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#318 · Filter by author dgkimpton opened on Aug 25, 2020
  3

• [Suggestion] Consider to use time proof solution with private and protected keywords

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#315 · Filter by author redradist opened on Aug 4, 2020
  39

• Motivation for PrivateFieldAdd type error?

  documentation
  tc39/proposal-class-fields#308 · Filter by author mgaudet opened on May 12, 2020
  5

• Why a new LexicalEnvironment Parameter?

  editorial
  tc39/proposal-class-fields#306 · Filter by author mgaudet opened on Apr 24, 2020
  10

• Execution of initializer expressions is confusing in readme

  documentation
  tc39/proposal-class-fields#299 · Filter by author papb opened on Mar 5, 2020

• How to fix this proposal's inheritance issues

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#276 · Filter by author rdking opened on Oct 16, 2019

• Could we have avoided "fields"?

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#274 · Filter by author rdking opened on Oct 6, 2019
  39

• Insufficient time allotted for acceptance testing [[Define]] semantics

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#273 · Filter by author rdking opened on Oct 4, 2019
  5

• Assigning a function to a private field isn't ideal

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#270 · Filter by author puppy0cam opened on Sep 14, 2019
  14

• A new proposal, maybe late maybe not.

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#264 · Filter by author aimingoo opened on Aug 21, 2019
  55

• How to dynamically access private properties/classes

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#257 · Filter by author d42ohpaz opened on Jul 18, 2019
  26

• The argument against this proposal

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#255 · Filter by author rdking opened on Jul 8, 2019
  23

• Do not hesitate to make design changes just because Chrome has shipped

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#254 · Filter by author jhpratt opened on Jul 1, 2019
  9

• Treating the # as part of a .# operator instead of as part of a field name #foo.

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#250 · Filter by author trusktr opened on Jun 26, 2019
  39

• Use [[Set]] by default, add define keyword. (was: TypeScript class fields have [[Set]] semantics.)

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#248 · Filter by author trusktr opened on Jun 17, 2019
  36

• Honour class property values set by parents

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#242 · Filter by author brianmhunt opened on May 30, 2019
  51

• Private member access from static methods

  documentation
  tc39/proposal-class-fields#239 · Filter by author rijnhard opened on May 20, 2019
  5

• Early Error rules need to be referenced explicitly in PerformEval

  tc39/proposal-class-fields#234 · Filter by author jorendorff opened on Apr 12, 2019
  1