-
> From: Garrett Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 9:20 PM
> To: Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK)
> Cc: es4-discuss@mozilla.org
> Subject: Re: ES3.1 Draft: Array generics
>
> On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 2:50 PM, Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK)
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
la.org
Subject: Re: ES3.1 Draft: Array generics
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 2:50 PM, Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Garrett,
> I apologize.
> I was not ignoring you. Yes, I am interested in feedback!
OK, but you seem to have misunderstood me.
>
> The initi
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 2:50 PM, Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Garrett,
> I apologize.
> I was not ignoring you. Yes, I am interested in feedback!
OK, but you seem to have misunderstood me.
>
> The initial Array generics proposal did not include the thisObj param as it
> w
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 2:50 PM, Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Garrett,
> I apologize.
> I was not ignoring you. Yes, I am interested in feedback!
>
> The initial Array generics proposal did not include the thisObj param as it
> was felt that it could open the door to some s
Garrett,
I apologize.
I was not ignoring you. Yes, I am interested in feedback!
The initial Array generics proposal did not include the thisObj param as it was
felt that it could open the door to some security issues. We were even
contemplating cutting Array generics from ES3.1 altogether. Later
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 3:37 PM, Douglas Crockford
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think we must implement the Array methods as currently understood, even with
> the regrettable thisObject parameter. The hazards of the misbinding of this
> are
> a particular problem for mashup platforms, so the use
On May 31, 2008, at 3:37 PM, Douglas Crockford wrote:
> The hazards of the misbinding of this are
> a particular problem for mashup platforms, so the use of the
> thisObject
> parameter will not be allowed in strict mode.
So IIUC, in ES3.1 strict mode, given
var a = [1,2,3];
this is an err
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On May 31, 2008, at 6:17 AM, Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK) wrote:
>
>> [I'll take shot at replying (and Doug can clarify)]
>>
>> A feature that is present in 3 out of 4 browsers makes it a candidate
>> for inclusion into ES3.1. However, that does not guarantee that it
>>
Maciej Stachowiak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2008 2:22 AM
> To: Douglas Crockford
> Cc: Erik Arvidsson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Pratap Lakshman
> (VJ#SDK); es4-discuss@mozilla.org
> Subject: Re: ES3.1 Draft: Array generics
>
>
> On May 20, 2008, at 7:35
31, 2008 2:22 AM
To: Douglas Crockford
Cc: Erik Arvidsson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK);
es4-discuss@mozilla.org
Subject: Re: ES3.1 Draft: Array generics
On May 20, 2008, at 7:35 AM, Douglas Crockford wrote:
> Erik Arvidsson wrote:
>> I know for a fact that not passin
On May 20, 2008, at 7:35 AM, Douglas Crockford wrote:
> Erik Arvidsson wrote:
>> I know for a fact that not passing the thisObject as the third param
>> in methods like map etc will break real world applications such as
>> Gmail. If JScript does not follow the defacto standard, developers
>> wil
2008/5/19 Pratap Lakshman (VJ#SDK) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I have uploaded to the wiki a draft proposal (link) for Array generics.
> I have extracted the Array portion of the ES3 spec, added a rationale (with
> hyperlinks) at the beginning, and made relevant changes to the included
> section 15.4 te
On May 20, 2008, at 8:02 AM, Erik Arvidsson wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 07:35, Douglas Crockford
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I disagree. Gmail can continue patching Array.prototype as it does
>> now, so
>> nothing breaks. But going forward, new applications should be
>> using bind i
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 07:35, Douglas Crockford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I disagree. Gmail can continue patching Array.prototype as it does now, so
> nothing breaks. But going forward, new applications should be using bind
> instead
> of a thisoObject.
Yes, Google can and will change it's us
Erik Arvidsson wrote:
> I know for a fact that not passing the thisObject as the third param
> in methods like map etc will break real world applications such as
> Gmail. If JScript does not follow the defacto standard, developers
> will have to add detection for this anormality. I think compatib
I know for a fact that not passing the thisObject as the third param
in methods like map etc will break real world applications such as
Gmail. If JScript does not follow the defacto standard, developers
will have to add detection for this anormality. I think compatibility
with other browser shoul
16 matches
Mail list logo
