I can sort-of understand the desire for the values to be hard-private, but I think even that would be achievable without new syntax[1]. However, they also want

I can sort-of understand the desire for the values to be hard-private, but I think even that would be achievable without new syntax[1]. However, they also want the existence and names of the properties to be hard-private, which seems excessive. (And linguistically inconsistent with the choice of non-hard-privacy for symbols.) [1]: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/177#issuecomment-448292545 https://github.com/tc39/proposal-class-fields/issues/177#iss...