On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:36 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
> wrote:
>>> It seems you either need to use a Proxy, some kind of wrapper method,
>>> or a custom implementation in most cases. Typically when objects akin
>>> to Map or Array are exposed
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
wrote:
>> It seems you either need to use a Proxy, some kind of wrapper method,
>> or a custom implementation in most cases. Typically when objects akin
>> to Map or Array are exposed in a platform API, mutating them has
>> observable (synchronous
On Dec 18, 2012, at 8:08 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Alex Russell wrote:
>> Object.observe() is a notification, not interception, mechanism. Where we
>> need to stratify an intercept, ES 6 Proxies are the mechanism we should lean
>> on, but in the main, we sho
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Alex Russell wrote:
> Object.observe() is a notification, not interception, mechanism. Where we
> need to stratify an intercept, ES 6 Proxies are the mechanism we should lean
> on, but in the main, we should ALWAYS seek to avoid using them. That is to
> say, if we
hey Anne, Sam! Comments inline:
On Monday, December 17, 2012, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Anne van Kesteren
> >
> wrote:
> > If down the road we want to allow for the theoretical possibility of
> > having all platform APIs implemented in JavaScript, we might wan
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> If down the road we want to allow for the theoretical possibility of
> having all platform APIs implemented in JavaScript, we might want a
> sync Object.observe. If we have types down the road as well (this
> might be a bit presumptuous),
Le 17/12/2012 15:56, Anne van Kesteren a écrit :
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:39 PM, David Bruant wrote:
Which part of the platform needs a sync Object.observe?
(Thanks for the reply.)
Thanks for your post.
I think nothing does per se, but it might make
manner more convenient.
I understand. It
From: es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org [es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org] on behalf
of Anne van Kesteren [ann...@annevk.nl]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 09:56
> By types I mean e.g. constraining set() to just accept strings.
I think the "JavaScript-y" way of doing this, as exemplified in the ES5
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:39 PM, David Bruant wrote:
> Which part of the platform needs a sync Object.observe?
(Thanks for the reply.) I think nothing does per se, but it might make
manner more convenient.
> I don't understand what you mean by "types". And I also don't understand
> what you can
Le 17/12/2012 15:19, Anne van Kesteren a écrit :
If down the road we want to allow for the theoretical possibility of
having all platform APIs implemented in JavaScript, we might want a
sync Object.observe.
Which part of the platform needs a sync Object.observe?
I feel all platform APIs can be i
If down the road we want to allow for the theoretical possibility of
having all platform APIs implemented in JavaScript, we might want a
sync Object.observe. If we have types down the road as well (this
might be a bit presumptuous), URLQuery could just be a MultiMap and
whenever the MultiMap was mu
11 matches
Mail list logo
