tc39/proposal-rm-builtin-subclassing

Issues

• Use case for overriding RegExp#exec (Type IV)

  #27 opened 5 months ago by slevithan
  1

• Sad to see it go

  #25 opened a year ago by d3x0r
  0

• Misleading proposal name?

  #24 opened 3 years ago by bathos
  7

• It will break the web

  #23 opened 4 years ago by zloirock
  29

• Type II support for promise `then` is essential for hooking into existing promises' lifecycles and observing them without a massive amount of complexity.

  #21 opened 4 years ago by dead-claudia
  4

• Additional complexity you could remove from Promises

  #5 opened 5 years ago by domenic
  17

• "Have a good time"

  #16 opened 4 years ago by mgaudet
  1

• Should Type IV subclassing restrictions also apply to non-RegExp classes?

  #18 opened 4 years ago by mgaudet
  1

• In defense of Type II

  #20 opened 4 years ago by getify
  9

• Type IV subclassing is largely orthogonal to other types; should it partake in the exit criteria?

  #17 opened 4 years ago by mgaudet
  1

• Moving this to TC39

  #14 opened 4 years ago by codehag
  1

• Deprecate `Symbol.species`

  #13 opened 5 years ago by ilias-t
  5

• Why not delegate to `this.constructor`

  #9 opened 5 years ago by syg
  1

• Clarify or fix derived class constructors in the examples

  #10 opened 5 years ago by jandem
  8

• Leave IsRegExp out of this?

  #4 opened 5 years ago by littledan
  3

• Editorial suggestion: Explain what stays the same in the README

  #2 opened 5 years ago by littledan
  5

• What is the difference between Type 2 and Type 3?

  #6 opened 5 years ago by jridgewell
  4

• Semantics suggestion: Use SpeciesConstructor just for new.target

  #1 opened 5 years ago by littledan
  9

• Ambiguity about what this does for static methods in subclasses

  #3 opened 5 years ago by littledan
  1