David Bruant (2013-09-11T15:53:51.000Z)
Le 11/09/2013 17:51, Allen Wirfs-Brock a écrit :
>>
>>     Ps: btw, wasn't "GetInheritance" supposed to be renamed
>>     "GetPrototype"?
>>
>>
>> I think we had agreement on that. Allen?
>
> I'm willing to call them [[GetPrototypeOf]] and [[SetPrototypeOf]] to 
> match the trap names. I prefer avoiding a direct connotation with the 
> [[Prototype]] internal data property as an exotic object is not 
> required to have one.
Is there a precedent of such an object?
Why can't such objects have a [[Prototype]] to null (as is the practice 
in userland JS)?

David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130911/7795524d/attachment.html>
domenic at domenicdenicola.com (2013-09-25T01:42:53.112Z)
Le 11/09/2013 17:51, Allen Wirfs-Brock a écrit :

> I'm willing to call them [[GetPrototypeOf]] and [[SetPrototypeOf]] to 
> match the trap names. I prefer avoiding a direct connotation with the 
> [[Prototype]] internal data property as an exotic object is not 
> required to have one.

Is there a precedent of such an object?
Why can't such objects have a [[Prototype]] to null (as is the practice 
in userland JS)?