On 31 January 2012 12:40, Tom Van Cutsem <tomvc...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/1/30 Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.org> >> Andreas Rossberg wrote: >>> On 30 January 2012 20:17, Oliver Hunt<oli...@apple.com> wrote: >>>> > From the PoV of JSC I suspect our biggest problem will actually be >>>> > our API, which essentially allows developers to override an arbitrary >>>> > collection of [[SomeInternalMethod]] methods, potentially inconsistently >>>> > (a >>>> > sad fact of our api is that you can override [[HasProperty]] and >>>> > [[GetProperty]] independently, and have them be inconsistent:( >>> >>> Well, it's not like the language's own object API (a.k.a. proxies) is >>> any better in that respect...;) >> >> It's still a win to have fewer such mouths to feed, and in particular, >> only one such mouth in the spec. I hope you're just reminding that proxies >> can be abused to violate invariants that we cannot enforce (efficiently or >> at all), not putting proxies into the same low class as JSC's (or >> SpiderMonkey's, or any other engine's) old/over-broad embedding API. > > Proxies (also direct proxies) can indeed expose inconsistencies between > fundamental and derived traps, but throwing away the derived traps in favor > of removing such inconsistencies seems like a bridge too far.
Yeah, I didn't intend to imply that we should change proxies, but only that Oliver doesn't need to be overly sad about JSC's API. /Andreas _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
