On Jan 11, 2010, at 7:49 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
If objects cannot be passed directly between modules without breaking
encapsulation, then it's not a particularly useful module system.
Passing only JSON objects, say, is not sufficient: it's necessary to
be
able to pass function objects, at least.
Catching up, trying not to rehash or reopen wounds...
I agree JSON is not enough, but frozen primordials could inhibit
adoption of modules.
Isolation does not require frozen primordials, no
matter how often you assume it does to conclude that it does.
What part of "I was incorrect in saying that mutable primordials
*necessarily* preclude isolation." did you not understand?
Sorry, I didn't mean to ignore what you wrote, but it was still not
enough. You adverted to the "virtualize mutations" alternative, but
then dismissed it as too complicated:
"It would be possible to virtualize mutations to a module's
primordials so that they are only visible to that module, in the same
way that Valija does. I don't favour that approach because it is very
much more complicated."
A couple of responses:
* Complicated for whom? The complexity of virtualized mutations is a
burden on implementors, who are few and expert. It relieves the more
numerous JS hackers from having to revise existing code (sometimes
there's no money to do so).
* The highly popular Prototype library, and a lot of extant code,
modifying primordials. If all such code must be rewritten to work in/
with modules, then modules have a steep adoption hill to climb.
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
