On Jul 3, 10:15 pm, Norris Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yep, I think Rhino's behavior should be different: for an assignment > to a property with only a getter defined, the assignment should cancel > out the getter.
But shouldn't defining a getter without a setter imply the property is read-only? At least that's the behaviour documented for getters defined via jsGet_/jsSet_: http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/apidocs/org/mozilla/javascript/ScriptableObject.html#defineClass(org.mozilla.javascript.Scriptable,%20java.lang.Class) I'm not sure generic java getters and setters are handled the same way, and I'm not sure they should be. But at least it's conceivable that people have been using it this way, so it might be a good idea to be careful with changes here. hannes > I've createdhttps://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=443491and > have a fix. > > --Norris _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-rhino mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-rhino
