>> So Object.prototype customization would cover all cases? Except Proxies, of >> course -- and host objects. > > Yes, except that what you would expect to put into Object.prototype would > actually (or also) be defined as default behavior in order to ensure that > that Object.create(null) objects, etc continue to have ES1-5 behavior. > Because collection behavior is defined via method invocation, proxies don't > need to do/have anything special (although a Proxy's [[Get]] handler) could > look for accesses to the special [ ] behavior methods. Same for host > objects, except who knows what a host object really is...
Have you come to a decision with regard to a separate .[] operator for collections (including arrays)? I think it’s better to rededicate []: - .[] would invalidate all existing array code. - [] would only invalidate code that uses computed property names. And that can be fixed via the default behavior. It might make sense to have a "stricter mode" that turns off the default behavior of []: - It would thus force you to use methods such as (the yet to be defined) Object.setOwnProperty() and Object.getProperty() when you want to compute the name of a property. - Stricter mode could also restrict [] for arrays to just numbers, including negative numbers for accessing elements relative to the end of an array. -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer a...@rauschma.de home: rauschma.de twitter: twitter.com/rauschma blog: 2ality.com
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
