domenic at domenicdenicola.com (2013-10-01T21:01:18.649Z)
Le 25/09/2013 12:01, David Bruant a écrit : > I think it's important to have a generic solution to avoid having > magic (non-self-hostable) built-ins (but I don't have this solution). Can relationships help here?
Le 25/09/2013 12:01, David Bruant a écrit : > Le 25/09/2013 11:18, Tom Van Cutsem a écrit : >> 2013/9/24 Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com >> <mailto:allen at wirfs-brock.com>> >> >> I think this is a key point. Things like 'new Proxy(new Date, >> {}).getDate()' just don't work as expected with direct proxies >> and we have not been able to fix that while maintaining other >> important semantic requirements. If JS programmer have an >> expectation that they can usefully write such code they are going >> to be disappointed. Direct proxies seem to be a fine primitive >> for implementing membranes and some virtual objects. They aren't >> good for things like this Date example. >> >> >> In my original direct proxies proposal, this would have worked >> because I proposed that a Proxy-for-a-Date be recognized as a genuine >> Date, with all Date.prototype.* methods auto-unwrapping the proxy, >> operating on the actual Date target. >> >> Off the top of my head I don't recall why this was a no-go. > IIRC, the problem was that this solution wasn't generic enough because > it couldn't work with userland private state. Auto-unwrapping with > Date and Set works because interaction is always through methods. It > is less clear how it should work for userland private state. > > Builtins are easy, because it's very clear which method is expected to > work with which object; there is a clear definition of what an > "instance" is and that can be tracked internally. Also, the > auto-unwrapping can be done safely, because it's done internally. None > of these two are true for userland private state. > > I think it's important to have a generic solution to avoid having > magic (non-self-hostable) built-ins (but I don't have this solution). Can relationships help here? David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130925/df6e8846/attachment-0001.html>