2009/10/31 Vladimir vla...@tiscali.cz:
well, why do I need some policy kit at all then?
You need policykit to check if an user or a group is authorized to do
a certain action. Also there should be a user-level policykit to
prevent or to allow certain user programs doing certain actions. You
maybe
On Nov 2, 2009, at 2:34 AM, memo...@googlemail.com wrote:
I like to use getter and setter on private objects (e.g. var test).
That is very unclear; I'm guessing you mean getters and setters
instead of plain variables in closures used to store private data.
I didn't found any way to do
2009/11/2 Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com:
On Nov 2, 2009, at 10:47 AM, Mike Samuel wrote:
What do getters and setters do around with?
var flipFlop;
with ({ get test: function () { return (flipFlop = !flipFlop) ?
'flip' : 'flop'; } }) {
for (var i = 0; i 10; ++i) { alert(test); }
The upshot for memolus is that with is already a deoptimizer that
introduces non-lexical names onto the scope chain. These can be
gettters and setters and have arbitrary effects. My point remains that
adding getters and setters to activations, which are modeled lexically
in the absence of
On Nov 2, 2009, at 3:05 PM, memo...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/11/2 Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com:
Defining accessors on an activation object is nasty,
If you want private getters and setters, you can put them in an
object denoted by a private var:
So you prefer ugly solutions, because
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
memo...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/11/2 Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.com:
Defining accessors on an activation object is nasty,
If you want private getters and setters, you can put them in an object
denoted by a private var:
So you prefer
6 matches
Mail list logo
