On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Gary Guo nbdd0...@hotmail.com wrote:
Oops, mistakes found. I just ignored the fact that in this particular way the
Symbol can be retrieved. It seems impossible to have an idea of private
symbol in this way. In the case, I think the language can provide a way
From: jackalm...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 00:45:40 -0800
There are ways around this, too - create your own Symbol, keep it
closure-private to the class, so it doesn't escape the class's
methods. Have the constructor take an extra argument that must be
equal to this symbol; if it's
But this is not the core of the problem. The problem is the Proxy
introduced in ES6 enables an object to capture and override almost any
operation on an object. Without operation on object, it becomes very costly
(by using an Array of created objects and compare each of them) to identify
whether
Oops, I forget the WeakSet. So seems my private symbol proposal can work now.
Under very deliberately design, private symbol can be used as private field.
```jsvar constructor=function(){'use strict';var allObjects=new
WeakSet();var privateSymbol=Symbol('private', true);var
Subject: RE: Proposal About Private Symbol
Oops, I forget the WeakSet. So seems my private symbol proposal can work now.
Under very deliberately design, private symbol can be used as private field.
```js
var constructor=function(){
'use strict';
var allObjects=new WeakSet();
var
That breaks membranes.
From: Gary Guomailto:nbdd0...@hotmail.com
Sent: 2014-12-21 20:00
To: Domenic Denicolamailto:d...@domenic.me
Cc: es-discuss@mozilla.orgmailto:es-discuss@mozilla.org
Subject: RE: Proposal About Private Symbol
I didn't quite get the point
```js
var constructor=function(){
'use strict';
var allObjects=new WeakSet();
var privateSymbol=Symbol('private', true);
var ret=function(){
if(this===undefined)throw Error('Invalid Construction');
this[privateSymbol]=1;
allObjects.add(this);
I have just sent this proposal through
http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/register_TC39_Royalty_Free_Task_Group.php
but I don't know what more I need to do. I am a high school student from China
who is interested in next-generation ecmascript and has been working on an
ecmascript
I don't think it's a problem though. As long as the private Symbol doesn't
leak, there is no way to access private properties. Private Symbol as I
supposed only eliminate itself from getOwnPropertySymbols, and that's
it,nbsp;there should not be no morenbsp;constraintsnbsp;on private
it is not exposed to Script-side.
From: d...@domenic.me
To: waldron.r...@gmail.com; nbdd0...@hotmail.com; es-discuss@mozilla.org
Subject: RE: Proposal About Private Symbol
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 20:11:04 +
For more reasons on why a simple private
Subject: RE: Proposal About Private Symbol
Oops, seems Outlook.com ruins my email. One more time
I don't think it's a problem though. As long as the private Symbol doesn't
leak, there is no way to access private properties. Private Symbol as I
supposed only eliminate itself from
problems there.
From: d...@domenic.me
To: nbdd0...@hotmail.com; es-discuss@mozilla.org
Subject: RE: Proposal About Private Symbol
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 02:58:15 +
Did you read the linked post? The problem is completely different from the one
you describe. It is about interoperability
Under careful use of the symbols, and without Object.getOwnPropertySymbols
leaking every symbol, we can use symbols as private field.
There are other ways that symbols can leak besides
`getOwnPropertySymbols`. Take a look at proxies, which allow you to
intercept [[Get]] and [[Set]].
In
2. They would not invoke any traps on proxies.
3. They would not tunnel through proxies to proxy targets.
4. Getting a private-symbol-keyed property would not traverse the
prototype chain of the object (perhaps arguable).
Unnecessary, as long as symbol doesn't leak to external environment, I
This');
this[sym]=1;
}
return ret.bind(undefined);
}();
```
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 22:48:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Proposal About Private Symbol
From: zenpars...@gmail.com
To: nbdd0...@hotmail.com
CC: es-discuss@mozilla.org
2. They would
This');
this[sym]=1;
}
return ret.bind(undefined);
}();
```
From: nbdd0...@hotmail.com
To: es-discuss@mozilla.org
Subject: RE: Proposal About Private Symbol
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 12:08:09 +0800
Technically speaking there is no way to prevent
16 matches
Mail list logo
