Mark and I discussed this privately a while back. We would rather use
the same attribute pair for both. Is non-writable configurable ok? I
argued that for name it is onerous to require Object.defineProperty
calls, e.g., from Cappuccino when compiling Objective-J into JS, to fix
up every function's name to tell its Obj-J pathname. But you wrote the
name proposal -- you should weigh in and even call this shot!
/be
Brandon Benvie <mailto:[email protected]>
August 30, 2013 11:39 AM
Part of the function name proposal submitted would make "name"
writable but not configurable, which is the inverse of the current
spec for "length" being configurable but not writable. Seems there
needs to be some discussion on what attributes should be where.
On Aug 30, 2013, at 7:36 PM, "Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Cool. In that case we have more freedom. In any case, we should give
both of these the same attributes.
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Claude Pache
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Le 30 août 2013 à 18:54, "Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :
> It seems we have legacy saying that "name" should be writable.
>
Really? Just tried in the console of the latest stable versions
of Firefox, Safari, Chrome and IE:
```
Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(function() {}, 'name')
```
Firefox, Safari and Chrome: `{value: "", writable: false,
enumerable: false, configurable: false}`
IE: `undefined`
—Claude
--
Cheers,
--MarkM
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Brendan Eich <mailto:[email protected]>
August 30, 2013 9:34 AM
Allen probably could use a bug on file at bugs.ecmascript.org -- anyone?
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Claude Pache <mailto:[email protected]>
August 30, 2013 5:35 AM
The `uncurryThis` metafunction, given as example in [1], needs to
correct the length of a function produced by `bind`. Simplified version:
```
uncurryThis = f => Function.protytpe.call.bind(f) //
uncurryThis(f).length == 1 instead of f.length + 1
```
So, yes, `bind` should produce functions with mutable length.
—Claude
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg21786.html
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Brandon Benvie <mailto:[email protected]>
August 30, 2013 3:54 AM
The latest spec revision makes the function "length" property
configurable (section 8.3.16.6). Function.prototype.bind (15.3.3.5)
still produces functions with non-configurable "length", however. I
think this may be an oversight, but I'm not sure.
_______________________________________________
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
