>> It is my understanding of B.3.1 that Object.prototype.__proto__’s only use >> is as a flag to switch off __proto__ for all objects (I’m assuming in >> settings similar to Caja). Wouldn’t it be better to introduce a real boolean >> flag, along with a unique name object? > > No. > > First, __proto__ is what it is, a de-facto standard (albeit with > non-configurability in some implementations, a bug to fix), and adding some > new switch elsewhere won't change things. So what you propose is redundant > (given configurability). > > Second, what's wrong with |delete Object.prototype.__proto__| as the > explicit, symbol-free (symbol = unique name) way of turning off __proto__ for > a given global object and object graph generated within that scope? It's > simpler and more direct than setting some other property for a side-effect.
OK, so this way of switching __proto__ off for all objects is already de-facto standard? Didn’t know, thought it was introduced with ES6. If so, then the de-facto standard obviously beats other ideas. If not then I don’t hate the delete, I just think that overloading __proto__ to be an off-switch in a single object feels slightly wrong. Is switching off __proto__ always an all-or-nothing proposition? Or will it be possible to selectively switch it off (e.g. by creating an object whose [[Prototype]] is null)? > The only issue remaining with __proto__ is whether it is a magic data > property, or an accessor with poisoned get and set pills on reflection. Ah, so the spec isn’t (possibly) yet final here(?) At the moment it’s a magic data property (spec-wise), right? -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer [email protected] home: rauschma.de twitter: twitter.com/rauschma blog: 2ality.com
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
