On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Tom Van Cutsem <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2011/12/5 Dmitry Soshnikov <[email protected]> > >> Just a note. Seems we're going to back to the unstratified API? When long >> time ago in that long thread ( >> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2010-October/011912.html) >> with `isCall' flag for `get', I was showing a similar example with >> `__noSuchProperty__' and `__noSuchMethod__' ( >> https://github.com/DmitrySoshnikov/es-laboratory/blob/master/examples/noSuchMethod.js), >> you were against such __magicAssignments__ to objects. Though, in my case >> those were proxies, created by alternative protocol: `Object.new'. >> > > Just to make sure I am not misunderstood: no, "we" are not going back to > the unstratified API! > > __noSuchMethod__ remains as unstratified as it ever was. > You mean you don't propose to standardize it or sort of? I.e. it's just a "library" variant of how one can implement `__noSuchMethod__'? Oh, then it's OK, since there can be many own implementations in particular libraries. > I maintain that the stratified Proxy API is safer than __noSuchMethod__. > Yup, especially if it can be achieved also with convenient "assignments", but still noSuchMethod will be meta-property and won't exist on the object ( https://github.com/DmitrySoshnikov/es-laboratory/blob/master/examples/meta.js ) > The above was simply an answer to the question as to whether proxies might > provide a way to support __noSuchMethod__ without turning your object into > a proxy. > I see, OK ;) It's a good variant of implementation. > They do, but that doesn't make __noSuchMethod__ any more principled. > > So, FTR, I still prefer using a proxy with a |get| trap over a > __noSuchMethod__ hook ;-) > > k, got it Dmitry. Cheers, > Tom >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
