if you consider Object.setPrototypeOf an API and __proto__ another one then I consider all variants of __proto__ other APIs
As you said we cannot get rid of so standardizing an extra one on top will create 5 different scenarios. Old __proto__ will go away, same could be for __proto__ if ES6 will propose only 1 API, Object.setPrototypeOf, which is new and then surely more consistent than any other version of __proto__ even with older browsers that supports __proto__ as non configurable and inherited in Object.create(null) . Bear in mind the only reason I am here again is that node.js might decide to drop __proto__ and without an alternative the server could miss a handy opportunity, for whoever needs it, to promote inheritance in existent objects. On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Andrea Giammarchi wrote: > >> > Adding Object.setPrototypeOf does not help, because code won't migrate >> to it >> > completely so we'll be stuck with two APIs. >> As shown in the first post we'll be stuck with 4 APIs plus the 5th one >> standardized. >> > > What 4 APIs are you talking about? > > > The __proto__ that is not supported, the one that is wrongly inherited in >> Object.create(null), the non configurable, and the configurable without >> get/set >> > > The old ones go away. We can't fix browsers in the field, you know that. > Your argument is unfairly lumping changes we *can* make with ones we can't > and counting them all against the ones we can make. > > > > SES and similar subsets would be >> > unable to protect secure code from ambient Object.setPrototypeOf usage >> > from the insecure side on the secure side's objects, unless >> > Object.setPrototypeOf were removed -- but that would break >> insecure-side >> > code that reasonably (per your wishes) uses Object.setPrototypeOf in >> > lieu of __proto__. >> same way SES can protect from __proto__ it can protect from >> Object.setPrototypeOf redefining in a way that who's white listed can >> obtain same result. >> > > No, same-frame mashups of SES and non-SES-that-uses-Object.**setPrototypeOf > cannot "whitelist" unless every SES object (or alternatively non-SES > object) is put in a whitelist weak-set. > > /be >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
