I do not understand what is being proposed. When I try to imagine a proposal starting from what has been said, I have not been able to imagine something that works. But that's not a criticism. What is this alternate privacy idea?
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > >> Note that the enumerable attribute really only affects for-in enumeration >> (and Object.keys), neither of which enumerates symbols anyway. That, means >> that the enumerable attribute really has has no current meaning for symbol >> keyed properties. That means we could probably reinterpret the enumerable >> attribute as a "private" attribute for such symbol keyed properties. >> > > Groovy. > > But the private-as-attribute idea still seems to require an access control > check, which makes it less secure from an OCap perspective and experience, > compared to symbols as capabilities. > > Wishing for Mark to weigh in here! > > /be > > -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss