On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:00 PM, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On May 29, 2011, at 12:55 PM, Thaddee Tyl wrote:
>
>> Don't be upset!
>
> Not at all, I'm simply skeptical (and saucy in saying so) about
> jurisdictional fights this early in thinking creatively about cross-cutting
> solutions. Seems kind of silly to call process police, doesn't it?
No fight intended.
>> I just believe that new HTML syntax would be better off in the HTML
>> living standard. More people read it, more people contribute to
>> correcting its bugs. Getting involved in it can only be beneficial.
>
> Yes, I agree, and public-script-co...@w3.org is read by all the best
> HTML5/HTML/W3C/WHATWG people, whatever their w3.org, whatwg.org, or other
> affiliations.
Does it mean that I should not discuss this here?
If not, I believe that, given the fact that browsers will implement
ES.next incrementally, we should find a way to allow graceful
fallback, rather than version-driven conditionals.
The fact that Harmony features are already batched up makes this easy;
maybe we can use a different use-pragma that already defined.
Something like an object literal. Object literals are so cool.
var features = Object.features || {};
features.es6 = features.es6 || {};
...
if (features.es6.proxies) {
Object.createHandled = function(proto, objDesc, noSuchMethod) {
var handler = {
get: function(rcvr, p) {
return function() {
var args = [].slice.call(arguments, 0);
return noSuchMethod.call(this, p, args);
};
}
};
var p = Proxy.create(handler, proto);
return Object.create(p, objDesc);
};
} else {
Object.createHandled = function(proto, objDesc, noSuchMethod) {
var p = Object.create(p, objDesc);
p.__noSuchMethod__ = noSuchMethod;
return p;
};
}
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
