On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:18 AM, Mark S. Miller wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We should have no more attribute "keywords" in property descriptors than >> we need to model the semantics we wish to reflect on via Object.* APIs and >> intercede in via proxies. Do we really want to split "DontDelete" back out >> of "configurable"? >> > > We do not. We need merely specify that (a non-frozen) array.length is > configurable but that arrays refuse to delete them. This is just part of the > magical length behavior provided by arrays, with the virtues that it can be > faithfully emulated by proxies. > > > Clever. To rephrase your previous reply to avoid double-negatives ("this is > not guaranteed not to be magical"), "configurable properties may behave > magically". > In retrospect, perhaps we should have named this attribute "magical" rather that "configurable"? And it is shorter. (Just kidding ;).) > I agree it's the non-configurable magic that we should address. > > Bonus, I think this will simplify things in our implementation of Array > length vs. the ES5 Object.* APIs. > Cool! Shrinking a case explosion is often a good sign. > > /be > -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
