Boris Zbarsky wrote:
All that said, I feel like I'm missing context in this discussion. Why do we need to change anything about how WebIDL attributes are reflected? There were good reasons for the current setup, including the fact that it's somewhat widely deployed already (e.g. implemented in Trident and Gecko) and that it allows authors to usefully interpose DOM getters/setters like they can already interpose methods.
David was questioning the new status quo, which is fine -- we benefit from being skeptical of our theories, as Feynman recommended. He was motivated by the extra complexity of ES5 accessors, which can be reflected on, extracted as get and set functions, called on wrong objects.
Your reply helps a lot, IMHO, in reaffirming why WebIDL, with Gecko, and Trident implementing, chose prototype-homed accessors. JITting proto-accessors is a thing engines already do. JITting through proxy traps (ignoring dummy target overhead) is in the future.
(And let's not ignore the dummy target overhead!) David, are you convinced? /be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
