On 2013/12/03 18:11:19, sof wrote:
On 2013/12/03 18:06:23, rossberg wrote:
> On 2013/12/03 17:57:17, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> > The only kind-of-spec for the "name" property on function objects is
the
> > proposal on the Harmony wiki (please correct me if there is a more
precise
> > specification that I am missing).
> >
> > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:function_name_property
> >
> > This proposal actually specs the property to be writable (even for
strict
> > functions). So while I agree that having different attributes for
strict
and
> > non-strict functions is weird, I am not sure this fix is going into
the
right
> > direction.
> >
> > Adding Andreas as a reviewer for his opinion on the matter.
>
> Actually, in ES6, .name will be non-writable but configurable (that is
already
> spec'ed in the draft). Could you modify the CL to do that?
The behaviour added here for this old compat property aligns with other
engines,
sorry for not mentioning that.
Do you want to make it non-writable for non-strict functions also?
Yeah, I'm a bit scared this might break the web. I don't think we want to
try
this without a flag.
OTOH, I also do not see much point in only changing it for strict mode
functions. So to be honest, I would rather hold off this change for the time
being.
https://codereview.chromium.org/99203006/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
