2009/11/2 [email protected] <[email protected]>: > 2009/11/2 Brendan Eich <[email protected]>: >>Defining accessors on an activation object is nasty, >>If you want private getters and setters, you can put them in an object >>denoted by a private var: > So you prefer ugly solutions, because the others are nasty? > >> The upshot for memolus is that with is already a deoptimizer that introduces >> non-lexical names onto the scope chain. These can be gettters and setters >> and have arbitrary effects. My point remains that adding getters and setters >> to activations, which are modeled lexically in the absence of eval, in >> strict mode in ES5, and under other such conditions, is a non-starter. > > I didn't get how to use "with" in order to use private objects > (non-lexical names onto the scope chain). Just ignore my example if it > tries to add getter and setter to already activated objects. You don't > have to implement it this way.
What is it that you want? Some use cases would help focus the discussion. > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
