Unsure about read_only interceptor property on a hidden prototype. Should we treat that the same as a normal read_only property on a hidden prototype?
http://codereview.chromium.org/434035/diff/1/2 File src/runtime.cc (right): http://codereview.chromium.org/434035/diff/1/2#newcode800 src/runtime.cc:800: // If we found readonly property below the global object Developers do not always agree on above/below. Can we use the formulation: If we found readonly property on a hidden prototype...? http://codereview.chromium.org/434035/diff/1/2#newcode822 src/runtime.cc:822: return ThrowRedeclarationError("const", name); This seems inconsistent with the case above. Should we shadow if there is an interceptor readonly property on a hidden prototype? That is what we do for a normal readonly property on a hidden prototype. http://codereview.chromium.org/434035/diff/1/2#newcode849 src/runtime.cc:849: // ASSERT(!lookup.IsProperty()); Code in comment. http://codereview.chromium.org/434035 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
