Tom Van Cutsem wrote:
[+Allen]
2013/3/13 Nathan Wall <nathan.w...@live.com <mailto:nathan.w...@live.com>>
However, as a matter of principle, my argument is that
`Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor` should, at the bare minimum,
return a descriptor that can be known to work in
`Object.defineProperty`. If `Object.defineProperty` doesn't accept
it, then you `getOwnPropertyDescriptor` didn't really give me a
valid descriptor.
I think that this behavior (1) limits the creativity of developers
to define properties like `Object.prototype.get`, (2) is a potential
stumbling block, (3) has no real benefit -- really, there's not
anything positive about this behavior, and (4) forces developers who
want to support `Object.prototype.get` to add an extra layer of
cleaning before using `defineProperty`.
While the monkey-patching of Object.prototype ("don't do that!") is
still the culprit, I agree that it would have been better if
defineProperty looked only at "own" properties of the descriptor. I
No, there are legitimate uses of Object.create(descriptorTemplate) with
descriptors.
almost always think of descriptors as "records" rather than "objects".
Similarly, perhaps Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor should have returned
descriptors whose [[prototype]] was null.
Herby
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
