On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> I (as one of the people who has advocated for symbols) disagree >> entirely. The JS object model extension required for symbols is small >> -- JS objects now map from either strings or symbols to values (plus >> prototype inheritance, getters, setters, configurability, >> writeability, and the other aspects of the JS object model the quote >> below glosses over). > > You've misunderstood the distinction between private slots and (unique) > symbols. Symbols are fine. I'm taking issue with the *new kind of slot* > that is created when using a private symbol.
There is no "new kind of slot". Symbols, private and otherwise, go in exactly the same kind of slot as any other object property. As Allan points out, this is clear in the object model portion of the spec, which does not distinguish any "new kind of slot". Sam _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
