Yes, M$ has promised actual ES5 compliance in IE9. Won't that be amazing! The main thing that prevents us from ever doing this is a problem that I outlined back in 2005, that we have never come to grips with:
http://www.openlaszlo.org/pipermail/laszlo-user/2005-November/002070.html Everywhere in the system, we store the state of our setters in a variable with the same name as the setter. This can't work if you use real setters (effectively it makes `=` invoke `setAttribute`, so there would be infinite recursion in `setAttribute`). I don't know any way to fix this other than a "flag day", like we announce that OL 6.0 will support the new way and you will have to fix all your code to use it... Maybe if we think about it, we could come up with a way to support the old setAttribute/<setter> syntax and a new syntax simultaneously. Perhaps the new syntax is something like: <method name="get thing"> return this.thingState; </method> <method name="set thing" value="newval"> this.thingState = newval; ... </method> but this would mean that to invoke the setter on `thing` you simply say `thing = newval`, and don't use `setAttribute`. I'm sure having two mechanisms active simultaneously will be very confusing. Anyone have a better idea? On 2010-12-11, at 14:14, Henry Minsky wrote: > This article > http://robertnyman.com/2009/05/28/getters-and-setters-with-javascript-code-samples-and-demos/implies > that > as of IE9, the major browsers (IE9, Firefox, Safari, Opera, Google Chrome) > support some kind of getters facility. > > When do we get to use them for lzs? It seems that will happen the day IE8 > finally is declared dead? > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Henry Minsky > Software Architect > [email protected]
