Le 03/07/2011 22:49, Mark S. Miller a écrit : > [+stay] > > I'd rather have a bug filed whose resolution we can postpone deciding. > I'll file it later today. Ok. cc me ([email protected]), please.
> The reason this is more important than it may appear is that there are > at least two other proxy implementations in progress that are probably > using FF as a reference, perhaps modulo the filed FF proxy bugs as > well as the speced semantics. oooooh... Are these implementations available somewhere? David > > > On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 12:44 PM, David Bruant <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Le 03/07/2011 21:32, Mark S. Miller a écrit : >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 11:07 AM, David Bruant >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Le 03/07/2011 14:59, Tom Van Cutsem a écrit : >> > As a follow-up to the fixed properties proposal: >> > >> > I created a prototype implementation of fixed properties on >> top of the >> > existing Proxy API. The idea is to wrap an existing proxy >> handler in a >> > FixedHandler. This FixedHandler does the bookkeeping and >> checking to >> > ensure that the wrapped handler doesn't misreport >> non-configurable >> > properties. >> > >> > Full source code available here: >> > >> >> <http://code.google.com/p/es-lab/source/browse/trunk/src/proxies/FixedHandler.js> >> Just to make sure I do not misunderstand your work: >> - Your code relies on current Proxy implementation behavior >> (FF4&5) >> which doesn't do any check on the "configurable" attribute for >> defineProperty and get{Own}PropertyDecsriptor traps >> >> >> I didn't know that. Is there a bug filed on this yet or a test >> case that demonstrates this bug? > ----- > var h = {getOwnPropertyDescriptor:function(name){return {value:1, > configurable:false};}}; > var p = Proxy.create(h); > > console.log( Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(p, 'a') ); > ----- > I just tried on Firebug (FF5) and it returned > {"value":1,"writable":false,"enumerable":false,"configurable":false}. > Should have returned configurable:true according to current proposal. > There is no bug filed I would be aware of. But I think there is no > rush and it can wait until decisions are made at the July TC39 > meeting, no? If the some form of the fixed property proposal is > accepted, it would replace any bug filed asking to always return > true for configurability. > Proxies bugs haven't received much attention lately anyway as far > as I know. > > David > > > > > -- > Cheers, > --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
