Seems like you decided that descriptor syntax is *necessary* for IE compatibility. I'm 80% sure it is not.
S On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Daniel Buchner <dan...@mozilla.com> wrote: > I guess it isn't a show stopper for poly-*ish*-fills, I would just wrap > the native document.register method where it is present > sniff the > incoming prototype property value to detect whether it was baked > cache > the unbaked prototype > then pass a baked one to the native method. > > Of course this means we'll (I'll) be evangelizing a polyfill with a > slightly augmented wrapper for taking unbaked objects, but for IE > compatibility devs will probably offer their first born, so I doubt they'll > bat an eye at such a benign incongruity. > > Daniel J. Buchner > Product Manager, Developer Ecosystem > Mozilla Corporation > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Scott Miles <sjmi...@google.com> wrote: > >> Remember where we started: absurdly clean ES6 class syntax. >> >> Requiring class definition class using property descriptors is a radical >> march in the other direction. >> >> I'm hardcore about syntactical tidiness. The reason I'm not freaking out >> about defineProperties is IMO because I can avoid it when I don't need it >> (which is about 99% of the time). >> >> Scott >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Daniel Buchner <dan...@mozilla.com>wrote: >> >>> I just made sure it worked, and it does. As for developers freaking out, >>> I really don't believe they would. If that was the case, >>> Object.defineProperties should be causing a global pandemic of >>> whopperdeveloper freakouts ( >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhF6Kr4ITNQ). >>> >>> This would give us easy IE compat for the whole range of property types, >>> and I'm willing to all but guarantee developers will have a bigger freakout >>> about not having IE9 support than the prototype property of >>> document.register taking both a baked and unbaked object. >>> >>> Daniel J. Buchner >>> Product Manager, Developer Ecosystem >>> Mozilla Corporation >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Scott Miles <sjmi...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Daniel Buchner <dan...@mozilla.com>wrote: >>>> >>>>> So you're directly setting the user-added methods on matched elements >>>>> in browsers that don't support proto, but what about accessors? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I believe those can be forwarded too, I just didn't bother in my fiddle. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Equipped with the unbaked prototype descriptor, in your upgrade phase, >>>>> you should be able to simply bake the node with: >>>>> Object.defineProperties(element, unbakedPrototypeDescriptor) - right? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, but I believe developers would freak out if we required them to >>>> provide that type of descriptor (I would). >>>> >>>> <snip> >>>> >>> >>> >> >
