On Sep 25, 2009, at 4:57 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Sep 25, 2009, at 1:18 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
So if you are doing more ArrayLike interfaces, let's keep talking.
Don't let at least my catchalls-considered-harmful statements stop
progress on ArrayLikes.
Perhaps when catchalls are considered for ECMAScript, there could b
a way to encapsulate the specific pattern of index access, so you
can have magical getters and setters for all index properties
(integer numbers in range to be an array index) without having to
install a full catchall for all properties.
Good point -- implementing array-likes via catchalls has been on our
minds since the ES4 "meta" days [1], although we never split hooks
based on property name being non-negative (possibly also <= 2^32 - 1
-- or is it <= 2^32 - 2?!).
With WebIDL folks' help we will probably take down ArrayLike first,
without going whole-hog for catchalls. The "catchalls climb the meta
ladder" problem is more profound than the index/length magic (even the
awful uint32 domain) of array-likes. I agree with Waldemar, we should
make progress on array-likes without getting hung up on catchalls.
/be
[1] http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=proposals:catchalls
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
