The curent argument for non-extensibility seems to be mozilla doesn't support them. It sounds like all other engines do.
There are plenty of reasons developers may want expandos - they're generally useful for holding different kinds of metadata. By requiring a separate object to hold that information we're merely making a developer's life harder. This is also inconsistent with all other magically-indexable types in ES and the DOM. I'm also not sure what the performance gains of inextensibility are, if DH could expand it would be greatly appreciated. --Oliver On Aug 27, 2013, at 9:04 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected]> wrote: > see meeting notes > https://github.com/rwaldron/tc39-notes/blob/master/es6/2013-07/july-24.md#54-are-typedarray-insances-born-non-extensible > > > On Aug 26, 2013, at 5:34 PM, Oliver Hunt wrote: > >> So I noticed in the last revision to the TA spec that a decision was made to >> prevent extensibility of them. Can someone say why that decision was made? >> It makes TAs somewhat unique vs. all other builtin types and doesn't match >> the behavior of Blink or WebKit implementations. >> >> While I am usually in favour of conservative behaviour I'd like more >> information on the reasoning behind this choice. >> >> --Oliver >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
