On Oct 2, 2012, at 9:46 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: > At this point I'd go with "Object" (IOW, _stet_), unless Allen has a thought.
I agree. Regarding 3, if it is easy spec-wide to make the prototype non-instances that would be preferable, but as long as the per instance state in the prototype is immutable I think it would be ok leaving it as currently specified. Allen > > /be > > Norbert Lindenberg wrote: >> TC 39, I need decisions so that I can finish the Internationalization spec >> and send it to the Ecma GA: >> >> 1) Instances of Intl.Collator, Intl.NumberFormat, and Intl.DateTimeFormat >> currently have [[Class]] "Object". Should this change to "Collator", >> "NumberFormat", and "DateTimeFormat", respectively? >> >> 2) If the answer to 1) is "yes": The prototype objects of Intl.Collator, >> Intl.NumberFormat, and Intl.DateTimeFormat currently have [[Class]] >> "Object". Should this change to "Collator", "NumberFormat", and >> "DateTimeFormat", respectively? >> >> 3) If the answer to 1) or 2) is "no": The prototype objects of >> Intl.Collator, Intl.NumberFormat, and Intl.DateTimeFormat currently have all >> the state that allows them to be used as instances. Should they not have >> that state, and instead be plain objects with methods? >> >> If I don't get votes from at least 10 of the usual TC 39 attendees within >> the next 24 hours, and a clear majority for change, the spec will remain as >> approved at the meeting two weeks ago. >> >> Thanks, >> Norbert >> >> >> On Sep 29, 2012, at 23:08 , Brendan Eich wrote: >> >>> Norbert Lindenberg wrote: >>>> Last week TC 39 approved a standard defining three new built-in >>>> constructors whose instances and prototype objects all have [[Class]] >>>> "Object". Also, the prototype objects are not constructed by their >>>> respective constructors, but initialized by them, e.g., as >>>> Intl.Collator.call({}). >>>> >>>> Are you suggesting they should have "Collator", "NumberFormat", and >>>> "DateTimeFormat", respectively, and the prototypes be specified as being >>>> constructed by their constructors? >>> All else equal, yes (sorry for not flagging these). >>> >>> Any non-equal elses in sight? >>> >>> /be >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> es-discuss@mozilla.org >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss