On Apr 23, 2012, at 6:09 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> ...
>
> The delete issue is very much along the lines of what I was referring to in
> another thread[3] today regarding "failure oblivious computing". I just
> don't think I see a big benefit from a throw in the situation of deleting a
> non-configurable property, particularly since there was already another
> mechanism (delete operator returns false) that indicates that the delete
> could not be performed.
>
> IMO, this the delete strict mode throw was unnecessary and borders on being a
> bad idea. Perhaps we could remove it from ES6. How much strict mode code do
> we think is going to actually be dependent on getting that exception?
>
> -1.
>
> The "failure oblivious computing" stuff is fascinating, but I wouldn't try it
> at home. Such code proceeds silently after it has lost integrity. Not great
> for anything important. Completely useless for code that must maintain
> integrity under adversarial conditions.
>
The point is that much of what is done on the web is not high integrity
computation. It is essential that high integrity be possible, when it is
required. But forcing all computation into the high integrity category seems
like as bad an idea as forcing all computation to be low integrity. I really
wonder how successful JS would have been if it had started out as a high
integrity language.
Allen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
