On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Dmitry Lomov <dslo...@chromium.org> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Andreas Rossberg <rossb...@google.com> > wrote: >> > A uvalue is deeply uvalue only when its prototype and all the methods >> > found >> > there are uvalues. Although this is the case for E, the implications for >> > JS >> > are, ahem, tricky. If they're not deep in this way, then they can't be >> > passed transparently between vats, address spaces, and machines. >> >> How can a prototype possibly be a fully structural value in >> JavaScript? Especially, since the language has this great feature of >> making all functions objects with identity? >> >> On the other hand, I also don't see how uvalues can work without a >> prototype link. So it seems that it's simply impossible to make them >> transparently transferable between vats in the way you desire (and I >> would, too). It seems that JavaScript is actively hostile to that >> idea. > > Correct, yes - I think Mark says the same thing when he says "the > implications are tricky". > "Passing transparently between vats, address spaces, and machines" must be a > non-goal for value objects as proposed. > That's also how I read "uvalues have a prototype ... when transmitted > between realms, uvalues retain this link" - among other things, it means > that uvalues from different realms are never equal (since their prototype > links are different by virtue of belonging to different realms).
You can never compare uvalues from different realms: both uvalues need to be in the same realm before you can do the comparison. All you need is that equal uvalues in realm A become equal uvalues in realm B when passed over. This is exactly how existing primitives work, right? --scott _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
