Agreed
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 3:34 AM, Tom Van Cutsem <[email protected]> wrote: > 2013/12/8 Brendan Eich <[email protected]> > >> We did not have consensus on per-object Get/SetIntegrity. I don't think >> we want the redundancy entailed. Implementors I've spoken with do not. This >> seems a dead snake, so no need to shoot at it. >> > > Thanks for digging up those links. Indeed, no need to revisit this. The > only requirement is that the abstract algorithms TestIntegrity and > SetIntegrity in the current ES6 draft use a reliable internal method for > querying the object's own properties (i.e. something like > [[GetOwnPropertyNames]] rather than [[OwnPropertyKeys]]). > > @Mark: you are right about the additional restriction. W.r.t. invariant > checks on proxies, I believe this implies that once a proxy's target is > non-extensible, the handler must return from its getOwnPropertyNames trap > exactly the set of properties returned from > Object.getOwnPropertyNames(target). That is: proxies cannot virtualize the > list of properties for non-extensible objects. While this may seem awkward > at first, this is precisely the restriction that we need so that > Object.freeze and isFrozen remain reliable in the presence of proxies. > > Regards, > Tom > -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
