2012/12/14 Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com
BTW, I think there are probably other related issues that need to be
discussed/resolved at that level. For example, is SameValue really want we
want for Map/Set equivalence (the -0 different from +0 issue), did we agree
to parameterize the
On 14 December 2012 16:39, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
No, the whole point of Number.isNaN is to provide a definitively test for
NaN number values which cannot be tested for in the usual way using ===.
The definitiveness of the test would be lost if other values such a
Le 18/12/2012 14:43, gaz Heyes a écrit :
On 14 December 2012 16:39, Allen Wirfs-Brock al...@wirfs-brock.com
mailto:al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
No, the whole point of Number.isNaN is to provide a definitively
test for NaN number values which cannot be tested for in the
usual way
hey Anne, Sam! Comments inline:
On Monday, December 17, 2012, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Anne van Kesteren
ann...@annevk.nljavascript:;
wrote:
If down the road we want to allow for the theoretical possibility of
having all platform APIs implemented in
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Alex Russell slightly...@google.com wrote:
Object.observe() is a notification, not interception, mechanism. Where we
need to stratify an intercept, ES 6 Proxies are the mechanism we should lean
on, but in the main, we should ALWAYS seek to avoid using them. That
[Reposted at David's request.]
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com
Date: Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: Function identity of non-configurable accessors
To: David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:08 AM, David Bruant
On Dec 18, 2012, at 8:08 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Alex Russell slightly...@google.com wrote:
Object.observe() is a notification, not interception, mechanism. Where we
need to stratify an intercept, ES 6 Proxies are the mechanism we should lean
on, but in
Hi,
Le 18/12/2012 18:08, Brendan Eich a écrit :
Mark S. Miller wrote:
That could work, but because of its complexity, I'm leaning back
towards the configurable data property that refuses to be
configured approach. Is there a problem with that? It self-hosts fine.
Certainly this is the
On Dec 15, 2012, at 2:51 PM, David Bruant wrote:
Le 15/12/2012 16:14, David Bruant a écrit :
Le 15/12/2012 15:49, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt a écrit :
If I create a non-configurable property with a getter that I define (such
as `() = 3`), I know that accessing the property will always produce
a
On Dec 18, 2012, at 9:08 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:
Mark S. Miller wrote:
That could work, but because of its complexity, I'm leaning back towards the
configurable data property that refuses to be configured approach. Is
there a problem with that? It self-hosts fine.
Certainly this is the
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
The whole whole idea of such invariants was a late addition to ES5, and not
without some controversy. I don't think anyone believed that ES5 had a
complete set of invariants or even what that might be.
As part
I'm trying to decode section 8.2.4
The Reference Specification Type
I believe that it is trying to say
obj.prop = ...
obj is reference base
prop is reference name
But base can also be Boolean, String, Number and env. record. I can't
figure out what a reference name means in these cases. I
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
If we are only talking about the Global Object, we can probably accommodate
almost anything by defining it as a special kind of exotic object.
AFAICT, we are only talking about the global object, in order to deal
{deletable: false} does not look that bad, semantically speaking ... you
don't have to explain much what that would do in a property descriptor.
Thing is, all others are false by default so you might want to chose same
default for this property and in this case the name is wrong.
FWIW: This topic has been on my mind for a long time. I’ve finally written down
my thoughts. Feedback welcome.
http://www.2ality.com/2012/12/es6-workflow.html
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
home: rauschma.de
twitter: twitter.com/rauschma
blog: 2ality.com
In that example obj itself would first have been a Reference with no base
and the name obj which would resolve to an environment record. Then after
prop would be another Reference with the resolved obj as its base and
prop as the name.
___
es-discuss
Er I was a bit unclear. It would look like:
objReference = {
base: undefined,
name: obj
};
Which would resolve to the object obj, on an environment record.
objPropRefence = {
base: IdentifierResolution(objReference),
name: prop
}
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Brandon Benvie
I see no reason why this needs to be a reflected property. As to
whether it is an exotic internal property or just prose, that is a
specification expository issue for which I defer to Allen. But the
spec only needs such extra state for the exotic global object. There's
nothing general about it.
On Dec 18, 2012, at 10:34 AM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
The whole whole idea of such invariants was a late addition to ES5, and not
without some controversy. I don't think anyone believed that ES5 had a
complete
On Dec 18, 2012, at 10:42 AM, John J Barton wrote:
I'm trying to decode section 8.2.4
The Reference Specification Type
I believe that it is trying to say
obj.prop = ...
obj is reference base
prop is reference name
But base can also be Boolean, String, Number and env. record. I
oops, I meant {base: 123.0, referenced name: toFixed, strict: false} below
On Dec 18, 2012, at 11:39 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Dec 18, 2012, at 10:42 AM, John J Barton wrote:
I'm trying to decode section 8.2.4
The Reference Specification Type
I believe that it is trying to say
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.comwrote:
...
I'r all in 8.2.4.1 and 8.2.4.2 (GetValue/SetValue).
Consider an expression like:
123.0.toFixed
This evaluates to a Reference value {base: 0, referenced name: toFixed,
strict: false}
(or strict is
At first glance, it seems like anonymous exports might provide a way for
pre-ES6 (read: Node) modules and ES6 modules to coexist. After all:
exports = function A() {};
just looks so much like:
module.exports = function A() {};
But is that the case? Does this oddball syntax actually
Hi all,
since we have our namespace in the wiki (Globalization) we decided to put
our strawman proposals there. I've created a new page -
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=globalization:strawman to hold them.
I've started adding proposals there just to describe the overall structure
of the
2012/12/12 Kevin Reid kpr...@google.com
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
I was a bit too strong in my statement, sorry. Let me rephrase: the
internal [[Target]] can't be changed, but a proxy can emulate changing of
fake target as long as what happens
2012/12/13 David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com
Le 13/12/2012 20:47, Jason Orendorff a écrit :
David: https://gist.github.com/4279162
I think this is what Kevin has in mind. Note in particular that the target
of the Proxy is just a dummy object, and the handler ignores it entirely.
The proxy
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
It seems you either need to use a Proxy, some kind of wrapper method,
or a custom implementation in most cases. Typically when objects akin
to Map or Array are exposed in a platform API, mutating them has
2012/12/13 Kevin Reid kpr...@google.com
Yes, exactly. I was just this minute in the process of writing such a
proxy myself, and have not yet confirmed whether it is accepted by the
invariant checks for all the cases I'm thinking of (testing against FF
18.0).
Note that either
(1) all the
2012/12/14 Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com
wrote:
David Bruant wrote:
Le 14/12/2012 08:25, Brendan Eich a écrit :
window.location can be set by assignment to navigate to a new URL.
location is [Unforgeable,
Hi,
Someone recently reported an issue [1] while using my harmony-reflect shim
for direct proxies. The fix probably requires a change in the proxy
specification. I'm unsure how to resolve it, so I thought I'd bring it to
the list.
The issue is as follows:
consider a proxy with an empty handler:
I think it has to be A, for consistency with [[Call]]. Note that when [[Call]]
is directly forwarded to the target, the this value is set to target. It
wouldn't be self-consistent if directly forwarded foo.access and foo.method()
invocations used different this values.
I assume that by proxy
On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:36 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
al...@wirfs-brock.com wrote:
It seems you either need to use a Proxy, some kind of wrapper method,
or a custom implementation in most cases. Typically when objects akin
to Map or Array
32 matches
Mail list logo
