Chris

The more think about these object literal they just don't make any sense to me. My vote would be to not implement this. Instead just function literals, module literals and...

What other problem does this solve, that can't be done with module literals? It just seems to have weird semantics, unlike any other language I know.

I don't think ```o4.x = 15;``` should be allowed. A module has a formal parameter list that defines what variables are parameters you can change and their default values. Object...

I think the terminology is confusing. An instantiation of a module makes a geometric object. It doesn't make something like a C++ object that has data members bound with functions...

So instead of include screw(M3_cap_screw, 10); I could do? screws = script(screws.scad); screws.screw(screws.M3_cap_screw, 10); Can I also do? screws = script(screws.scad); screw = screws.screw; the_screw = screws.M3_cap_screw; screw(the_screw, 10); On...

I thought one of the mains point was to import into a namespace, so I don't think it is correct to put modules into the scope of the calling module....

Are you expecting to phase out the use of old style functions and modules? I would only use a new style function if I wanted the pass it, which is...

@t-paul I don't see why it needs to emulate ```use``` as in 2 because one can still use ```use``` if one wants that behaviour. @doug-moen Yes I often use ```screw...

Object literals don't seem to be a replacement for modules unless I am missing something. When you define a module you specify the parameters. Anything inside the module is private....

If you have: ```C = module(x) { r = x / 2; sphere(r) } o = C(5);``` As I understand it you can do ```ECHO(o.x)``` and get 5 but can...