Re. the cryptic error messages when triggering missing derived or
fundamental traps: is there any reason why an engine can't create
understandable error messages for these cases?
An error message such as non-callable defineProperty trap on proxy would
more readily identify the problem than
I think there would be a couple of differences between a noop-handler and a
forwarder-to-an-empty-object.
For one: defining a property on a forwarder-to-an-empty-object would
actually define the property on the empty object. AIUI, the noop handler
would silently absorb the assignment. Fixing
Hi David,
Your questions are very relevant, and we did consider some of these issues.
They are part of the reason why we split the traps into fundamental and
derived traps, and why we specified that derived traps have a default
behavior (in terms of the fundamental traps). That at least gives us
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 4:20 AM, David Bruant bru...@enseirb-matmeca.frwrote:
Hi,
Thanks to yours answers I understand now that I had a wrong idea of
proxies.
I understood proxies as regular objects + 'event' handlers. I thought
that you could assign properties to a proxy as you do with an
Hi David, I'm forwarding your message to es-discuss as it has no direct
relevance to ES5 per se.
All, please reply only on es-discuss.
-- Forwarded message --
From: David Bruant bru...@enseirb-matmeca.fr
Date: Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:08 AM
Subject: On ES Harmony proxies
--
From: David Bruant bru...@enseirb-matmeca.fr
Date: Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:08 AM
Subject: On ES Harmony proxies extensibility
To: es5-disc...@mozilla.org
Hi,
Working on writing the MDN doc for ES Harmony proxies
(https://developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects
We have previously discussed adding standard handlers to the specification,
i.e. an NoopHandler and a ForwardingHandler.
Yes, and Tom and Mark have been working on this and making good progress. They
have a forwarding handler mostly worked out, which we discussed yesterday at
the
Should we have a no-op or sink standard handler too?
I think so, yes. Especially since you can use that to build one up that
implements just the other traps you want to implement, and let the others fail
soft.
Dave
___
es-discuss mailing list
Not sure; I'll think about it. Though abstracting
Proxy.Handler(Object.create(null, {})) might in fact be a worthwhile
convenience.
Dave
Mark S. Miller erig...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 2:45 PM, David Herman dher...@mozilla.com
wrote:
Should we have a no-op or sink standard
9 matches
Mail list logo
