I think there is something deeper lurking behind this issue. Proxies can be
used to define objects whose property semantics can be quite different from
those of native objects. In some situations the built-in Object. reflection
functions are not going to be flexible enough to reify a mirror model of those
semantics. If the designers of such proxy-based object abstraction want to
expose their unique semantics to reflection-based manipulation they are is
going to have define new reflection functions that are specific to their
abstraction.
I think we probably need to work through some such scenarios to understand if
there are any lurking issues. One thing I'm wondering about is whether any
additional "back-door" access to a proxy's handler will be necessary to cross
to the meta level. For example, imagine:
OrderedObject.reorder(obj,["prop3","prop2","7","prop12","1"]); //2nd
argument re property names in their new order
How does the the reorder function communicate with obj's handler instance
without also exposing a meta-level API to the application-level. Actually,
private names might provide a solution.
Allen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
