On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Domenic Denicola <
[email protected]> wrote:

>  Really?? http://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-15.15.5
>

Wow, yep. For some reason, when I saw that example, I only recalled the
original WeakMap proposal—which is 2 years out of date. VERY sorry for the
confusion.


Rick





>
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* [email protected] [[email protected]]
> on behalf of Rick Waldron [[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2013 14:57
> *To:* Nathan Wall
> *Cc:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: WeakMap better than Private Symbols? (was: direct_proxies
> "problem")
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Nathan Wall <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>     // ES6 WeakMap
>>
>>     let timeMap = new WeakMap(),
>>         // Store WeakMap methods to maintain integrity of the internal
>> state.
>>         WeakMapGet = Function.prototype.call.bind(WeakMap.prototype.get),
>>         WeakMapSet = Function.prototype.call.bind(WeakMap.prototype.set);
>>
>
>
>  Just a heads up, this is unnecessary and actually won't work at all.
> WeakMap has nothing defined on its prototype property—all methods are
> late-bound to the instance for the same reason you mention in the comment.
> https://gist.github.com/4505255
>
>  Rick
>
>
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Reply via email to