2013/10/18 Till Schneidereit <[email protected]> > I share this concern. Last time we discussed it, Brendan said that we > could implement it by falling back to .get if .invoke isn't > defined[1]. I'm not sure how well that fits into the rest of the Proxy > design, though. >
It doesn't fit the direct proxies design (which wants to forward to the target by default for missing traps), but it does fit the old proxy design (where the proxy would indeed fall back to more primitive traps if more specialized traps were missing). There is a case to be made for switching designs for backwards-compat reasons. It would be symmetry breaking but it would give us the necessary leeway to evolve the API. Worst-case, as Allen mentioned, we can introduce a distinct proxy constructor. Cheers, Tom
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
