On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Isiah Meadows <isiahmead...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> On Feb 23, 2015 6:06 AM, "Andrea Giammarchi" <andrea.giammar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Jordan Harband <ljh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
[...]
> >> - We'd definitely want `Map.empty` and `Set.empty` assuming
> `Object.freeze` actually froze them
>
> Object.freeze does not freeze them, as far as I know. It might require
> method overrides.
>
Object.freeze does not freeze their state. A proposal for a way to either
freeze the state of collections, and/or to create frozen snapshots of
collections, for future ES would be welcome and appreciated. I encourage
any such effort to pay attention to Clojure and React.
> >> - We'd probably want
> `Object.freeze(Object.seal(Object.preventExtensions(empty)))`, to be extra
> restrictive.
>
> Doesn't Object.freeze imply the other two? I thought it did.
>
It does. Given that all these methods of Object have their original value
and that x is not a proxy
Object.freeze(Object.seal(Object.preventExtensions(x)))
must be equivalent to
Object.freeze(x)
--
Cheers,
--MarkM
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
