Hi,
Here's some code from jsproxy.h:
inline bool IsObjectProxyClass(const Class *clasp)
{
return clasp == js::ObjectProxyClass || clasp ==
js::OuterWindowProxyClass;
}
inline bool IsFunctionProxyClass(const Class *clasp)
{
return clasp == js::FunctionProxyClass;
}
inline bool
It looks like ProxyClass is only used for the Proxy object that we add to the
global (i.e., the thing that allows you to do Proxy.create). That object isn't
actually a proxy at all. It probably would make sense to rename ProxyClass to
something less confusing.
-Bill
- Original Message
Agreed. Hard to think of a name that isn't ambiguous with
ObjectProxyClass/FunctionProxyClass. Perhaps ProxySingletonClass?
- Original Message -
It looks like ProxyClass is only used for the Proxy object that we
add to the global (i.e., the thing that allows you to do
Proxy.create).
+1, FWIW. Templates as implementation detail should be abstracted using
typedefs. Even templates as API can use typedef shorthanding -- it's a
form of BD programming to make all consumers spell out the long-hand
just to be over-concrete, or pay homage to C++.
/be
Bobby Holley wrote:
I like
ProxyConstructor or java style proxyfactory
On Jun 20, 2013 8:12 PM, Luke Wagner l...@mozilla.com wrote:
Agreed. Hard to think of a name that isn't ambiguous with
ObjectProxyClass/FunctionProxyClass. Perhaps ProxySingletonClass?
- Original Message -
It looks like ProxyClass is
Then the question becomes whether in this case the templates are an
implementation detail or a useful part of the type. bz has code that
makes use of the fact that they're templates. It sounds like our marking
code does something similar. Both of those imply that it is an aspect of
the types
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Steve Fink sf...@mozilla.com wrote:
I suppose you could argue that you could use both, typedefs by default and
templates only when you need them. But having both means people always have
to decide which to use, which feels to me like unnecessary API friction.
It's not a factory. Cc'ing Dave and Sam, who may have a thought. We've
talked in TC39 about putting it in a built-in module.
/be
Tom Schuster wrote:
ProxyConstructor or java style proxyfactory
On Jun 20, 2013 8:12 PM, Luke Wagnerl...@mozilla.com wrote:
Agreed. Hard to think of a name
ProxyConstructor
That's the one I like best so far.
Nick
___
dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list
dev-tech-js-engine-internals@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
I agree that doing the same thing inside and outside SpiderMonkey is preferable.
I slightly favour using typedefs, to minimize keystrokes. For the
weird bz case he can use explicit template syntax.
Nick
___
dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list
10 matches
Mail list logo
