>From the proposal: Note that makeWeakRef is not safe for general access since it grants access > to the non-determinism inherent in observing garbage collection.
What does that mean? That they don't expect this to be exposed to the web? In that case, why bother speccing it, and why would we need to be concerned with implementing it? FWIW, I strongly believe that we should refuse to implement specs that make GC effects any more observable than they already are on the web. bholley On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Jason Orendorff <jorendo...@mozilla.com>wrote: > This proposal is before TC39 for inclusion in the next ECMAScript spec > edition following ES6: > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:weak_references > > Mozilla GC hackers are opposed, for reasons they can articulate; I'm > opposed because I can't stick the nondeterminism and because the total > cost is out of all proportion with the benefit. > > However. There are use cases. Please see: > https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-February/028572.html > and subsequent messages. > > Also, though I think this use case is weaker: > https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-March/029423.html > > If you're a GC hacker and you want to stop this train, your best bet is > to read those threads and speak up now. > > -j > > _______________________________________________ > dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list > dev-tech-js-engine-internals@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals > _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list dev-tech-js-engine-internals@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
