On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 12:45 PM Gijs Kruitbosch <[email protected]> wrote: > > Is there a bug on file to replace privileged code calling Cu.cloneInto() > with a dummy scope/sandbox argument (ie using that as a cheap way to do > a structured clone) and similar workarounds with this standards-based > one?
Not that I am aware of yet. Mike opened a bug for replacing the `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(x))` pattern: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1733813 >And in what release cycle would it be safe to start using this in > privileged code? (we normally wait a cycle or two, I think) > We are shipping this everywhere in 94, considering we have to wait for the soft freeze, 95 should be fine. -Tom > ~ Gijs > > On 01/10/2021 10:00, Tom Schuster wrote: > > (Sorry for not sending this earlier) > > > > Summary: The structuredClone function directly exposes the structured > > cloning mechanism to allow (deep) cloning of values/objects. > > > > Bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1722576 > > > > Standard: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#structured-cloning > > > > Platform coverage: All > > > > Preference: None > > > > DevTools bug: N/A > > > > Other browsers: Not yet in any other browser. > > > > web-platform-tests: > > https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/tree/master/html/webappapis/structured-clone > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "[email protected]" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-platform/CAN7ST63gifdQXfHshVeJvgze%2BZK7f%3Dko5BgKyh6jwXGxDB%3Dt7Q%40mail.gmail.com.
