From: annevankeste...@gmail.com [mailto:annevankeste...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Anne van Kesteren
> That's why I tried to scope this thread to upgrading and not the script side.
>
> The main question is how you tie MyInputElement to something like
> and have that actually work. It seems Dimitri
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 5:53 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
> ... all instances of MyInputElement will get all internal slots and other
> exotic behavior of HTMLInputElement.
That's why I tried to scope this thread to upgrading and not the script side.
The main question is how you tie MyInputElemen
This is all intimately tied to the still-ongoing how-to-subclass-builtins
discussion that is unfortunately happening on a private TC39 thread. The
essential idea, however, is that as long as you do
```js
class MyInputElement extends HTMLInputElement {
constructor() {
super(); // this is ke
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Dimitri Glazkov
> wrote:
> > Right, that's why to create a valid custom element that subclasses
> > HTMLInputElement, you should use type extensions. With type extensions,
> the
> > HTMLInputElement is wh
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
> Right, that's why to create a valid custom element that subclasses
> HTMLInputElement, you should use type extensions. With type extensions, the
> HTMLInputElement is what's instantiated.
But without using type extensions this will work (pr
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 7:06 PM, Dimitri Glazkov
> wrote:
> > Yes to the first question. I wasn't planning on doing anything different
> > there.
>
> It seems simple prototype munging but not actually changing identity
> will fail for al
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 7:06 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
> Yes to the first question. I wasn't planning on doing anything different
> there.
It seems simple prototype munging but not actually changing identity
will fail for all but the basic cases of subclassing. E.g. if I
subclass an HTMLInputElem
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dimitri Glazkov
> wrote:
> > That section needs to be updated, because the ES6 spec had shifted a
> little
> > bit with regard to @@create. Filed
> > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27769.
>
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
> That section needs to be updated, because the ES6 spec had shifted a little
> bit with regard to @@create. Filed
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27769.
Yeah, there's issues in general there, such as ES6 giving up on
explain
That section needs to be updated, because the ES6 spec had shifted a little
bit with regard to @@create. Filed
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27769.
Conceptually, when I wrote it I'd imagined that the constructor will be
called only when you explicitly invoke it (new FooElement...)
10 matches
Mail list logo
