Hi All,
Please use public-script-coord for Web IDL.
-Thanks, AB
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [WebIDL] interface objects and properties too restrictive?
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 20:36:00 +0200
From: ext Travis Leithead <[email protected]>
To: Jonas Sicking <[email protected]>
CC: Cameron McCormack <[email protected]>, "Sam Weinig ([email protected])"
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sure.
Not only does ES5's configurable: false property prevent deletion, but it also
prevents changing a property from a field to an accessor and vice-versa, as
well as changing the getter/setters of the property.
So, the following wouldn't work if the "appendChild" property was
configurable:false:
Object.defineProperty(Node.prototype,
"appendChild",
{ get: function() { /* custom getter replacement */ },
set: function(x) { /* custom setter replacement */ }
});
... which is the ES5 way of doing:
Node.prototype.__defineGetter__("appendChild", function() { /* custom getter
replacement */ });
Node.prototype.__defineSetter__("appendChild", function(x) { /* custom setter
replacement */ });
So, configurable: false prevents users from replacing built-in properties with
getter/setters. I think this is too restrictive, especially forward-looking
considering how much the DOM is changing and evolving.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jonas Sicking [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 5:22 PM
To: Travis Leithead
Cc: Cameron McCormack; Sam Weinig ([email protected]); [email protected]
Subject: Re: [WebIDL] interface objects and properties too restrictive?
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Travis Leithead<[email protected]> wrote:
Hey folks, just wondering what the justification behind the current
{DontDelete} semantics are in WebIDL 4.4 [1] and 4.5 (second bullet)
[2]. When our IE9 binding ported this to ES5, it translated to
"configurable: false", which completely destroyed the ability to set
accessors on the interface objects as well as operations (and in our
case, DOM accessors). Because of this, we actually don't mark our
interface objects OR operations/attributes as configurable: false,
rather configurable: true.*
If this seems reasonable, I'd like to see the spec updated.
Sorry, I'm not very updated on the differences between the ES3 and ES5 worlds. Why does
"configurable: false" destroyed the ability to set accessors? Can you give an
example of a piece of script that doesn't work but which you'd like to work, and what
you'd like it to do?
/ Jonas
