I thought I'd give a heads up as over on www-...@w3.org we're
discussing two cases where we likely need to change the prototype
chain of objects: document.open() and methods that do the equivalent
of document.adoptNode() (including that method itself):
Le 24/12/2012 10:48, Anne van Kesteren a écrit :
I thought I'd give a heads up as over on www-...@w3.org we're
discussing two cases where we likely need to change the prototype
chain of objects: document.open() and methods that do the equivalent
of document.adoptNode() (including that method
With the problem at hand and the solution currently being proposed
(nodes changing of [[Prototype]] on adoptNode), it will remain possible
to observe objects changing of [[Prototype]] after a delete
Object.prototype.__proto__. I don't know to what extends it's a good or
a bad thing, but I
That doesn't seem to be a problem. Host objects may be losing most/all of
their magic but it's certainly reasonable that they have privileged access
to capabilities. I think it makes sense to frame deleting __proto__
as simply removing access to a capability from the user, but the capability
still
Le 24/12/2012 15:50, Brandon Benvie a écrit :
That doesn't seem to be a problem. Host objects may be losing most/all
of their magic but it's certainly reasonable that they have privileged
access to capabilities. I think it makes sense to frame deleting
__proto__ as simply removing access to a
Given the following:
var x = [1,2,3];
x.push(x);
x+;
What should happen? The behavior demonstrated by V8, Spidermonkey, and
Chakra (haven't tested others) is to return the empty string for cycles,
thus returning the result '1,2,3,'. However, unless I'm missing something,
this behavior is
I meant JSON.stringify explicitly specifies how to handle cycles.
On Monday, December 24, 2012, Brandon Benvie wrote:
Given the following:
var x = [1,2,3];
x.push(x);
x+;
What should happen? The behavior demonstrated by V8, Spidermonkey, and
Chakra (haven't tested others) is to return
I realized this is more appropriately filed as a bug (I think it's a spec
bug anyway...) and have done so
https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1184.
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
While seemingly out of date (though looks to have been updated recently),
the modules_standard proposal is still listed as ostensibly part of harmony
(ES6). For the most part it simply lists all the standard builtins from
chapter 15 but there's a few new things in here. What caught my eye a while
Hi,
I've reading the loader API [1] and I was wondering if it was possible
to dynamically change the global. I think it is by doing the following,
but tell me if I'm wrong:
const options = {
global : {
changeGlobal: function(g){
options.global = g;
To clarify: are you asking if an arbitrary object is a valid global object
when using a custom loader? If not, then I have a lot of code to rewrite.
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 5:34 PM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I've reading the loader API [1] and I was wondering if it was
I meant, if the answer to your question is no. =/
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Brandon Benvie
bran...@brandonbenvie.comwrote:
To clarify: are you asking if an arbitrary object is a valid global object
when using a custom loader? If not, then I have a lot of code to rewrite.
On Mon, Dec
Le 24/12/2012 23:37, Brandon Benvie a écrit :
To clarify: are you asking if an arbitrary object is a valid global
object when using a custom loader? If not, then I have a lot of code
to rewrite.
What I'm asking is:
is the global in the loader the initial or the dynamic value of the
global
For that matter, you've implemented the initial solution in continuum
[1] because you look at options.global when constructing the loader, but
never look at it ever after.
By the way, maybe you should Object-wrap it or throw if it isn't an
object? The proposal doesn't say which should occur.
just in case someone forgot the great job this group has done for the whole
2012 ... thank you from the community or, at least, from one of those devs
out there using stuff decided in this group since ever!
br
___
es-discuss mailing list
15 matches
Mail list logo
