with all due respect Allen, I'm completely against magic-function-name assignment for various reason and leaking ain't one.
What could you assign in ES6 that cannot be retrieved anyway through getOwnPropertySymbols and getOwnPropertyNames ? A triple-magic private Proxy handler or what? I mean, the moment you could access that method is the moment it could leak with or without a name, right? Just curious about what you had in mind, again I agree having this in is a no-go. Best Regards On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jul 26, 2015, at 5:11 AM, Benjamin Gruenbaum wrote: > > > In theory this sounds like a cool idea, I didn't even know variable > assignments named functions. > > > > The only issue I see here is how we're now differentiating assignment by > where it happens - what if the property is computed? As far as I know > function names are more constrained (like variable names) in what they can > be. Object properties may contain characters that function names may not. > > the possibility that the property key is a symbol is a primary reason that > this expression form does not set the `name` property. > > There may also be security concerns. The `name` property potentially > leaks via the function object the name of the variable it is initially > assigned to. But there isn't much someone could do with a local variable > name, outside of the originating function. But a leaked property name > potentially carries a greater capability. > > Allen > _______________________________________________ > 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
