Andreas Rossberg wrote:
On 27 December 2012 18:25, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.com <mailto:bren...@mozilla.com>> wrote:

        That is, if having it at all, I'd still think it much wiser to
        ban it to some Appendix.


    What earthly good would that do?


Marketing and psychology (as I said, being important). It would send a clear message that it is just ES adopting some bastard child because it has to for political reasons, but with no intention of ever making it a true bearer of its name. In other words, it isn't noble.

In one sense, whatever floats your boat.

In a more serious vein, we are at cross purposes with reality. Mutable __proto__ just *is*. It is a de-facto standard. Doesn't mean we shouldn't fight [[Prototype]] changes where better methods of achieving desirable semantics exist. But calling mutable __proto__ a bad thing, deprecating it, will not work, and therefore the attempt degrades the coin of TC39's realm: our attitude and opinion on normativity.

Self had writable parent slots. One can disagree with the design decision, but it's not unique to JS or uniquely evil. We swallowed this turd. No point whinging about it in appendices that either no one reads, or else people read and think less of the spec on that account.

/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Reply via email to