On Aug 3, 2012, at 5:58 PM, David Bruant <[email protected]> wrote: [...] > In the end, revokability can be implemented, but the nice GC property that > should come along can only be implemented if the revokable proxy does not > support invariant checking. Regardless, it still requires to delete all > configurable properties of the dummy target on revokation, which may take > some time. > > As we've seen with the Hueyfix, having enabling GC thanks to revokation > sometimes yields tremendously excellent results (whether the properties of > the GC'ed objects are configurable or not, this should not matter). I think > it justifies language-level revokability.
I see you point. This gc issue surprises me. I agree it seems serious. I hate to complexify the proxy design yet further, but I don't see how a library could workaround this restiction otherwise. Other than the additional complexity, which is a significant argument against, what other arguments are there against enabling a proxy to drop its target? _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
