On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Andrea Giammarchi <andrea.giammar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just wondering if this is actually meant/expected, I am talking about the > example here: > > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:observe#example
I'm not sure I understand your point. The example is not normative and it doesn't say anything about timing. > and the fact it should show something in console while in my opinion that > should show nothing since the Object.unobserve is called in the same "tick" The delivery of the mutation records is async, not the calls to Object.observe or Object.unobserve. > Then I read the algo and I wonder if this won't create many problems, i.e. > enabling a new way to leak objects through observers that should not be > called once the object is not observed anymore, specially because there's no > way to understand if the object is observed or not, isn't it? Leak in what sense? Memory, security? If someone has access to a non frozen object they can observe changes to its data properties. This is not a new capability, it can be done today by polling or rewriting them as accessors. > Thanks for any sort of clarification. I'm not sure that answer your questions? -- erik _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
