"If a field is absent then the result of any test of its value is logically false."
I believe there are two plausible ways to interpret this: any evaluation of desc.[[Something]] when there is no [[Something]] field returns the value false, or the result of any comparison which evaluates desc.[[Something]] must be false. The difference shows up in step 7b, whose wording is: "Reject, if the [[Enumerable]] fields of current and Desc are the Boolean negation of each other." Under the first interpretation, if there is no [[Enumerable]] field in Desc, then never Reject. Under the second interpretation, if there is no [[Enumerable]] field in Desc, *and* if current.[[Enumerable]] is true, then Reject. Past email to this list makes clear the first interpretation was the desired one. Here's a wording proposal which, I think, admits only the first interpretation: "If a field is absent, then the result of any test which uses that field's value is logically false." Jeff _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
