ES4 draft: Object

Lars Hansen lhansen at adobe.com
Mon Mar 10 19:01:04 PDT 2008


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Waldemar Horwat [mailto:waldemar at google.com] 
> Sent: 10. mars 2008 19:40
> To: Lars Hansen
> Cc: es4-discuss at mozilla.org
> Subject: Re: ES4 draft: Object
> 
> Lars Hansen wrote:
> > The feature was approved by the WG and solves a practical problem.
> > If another way to solve this practical problem is proposed 
> (in a more 
> > structured form than in the ongoing discussion) and finds 
> favor with 
> > the WG, then fine -- of course we can replace it.  Until then, this 
> > feature stays as it is until the WG can be convinced that 
> it needs to 
> > be removed.  Personally I think that "it is ugly/abhorrent"
> > is a weak basis on which to remove the current feature.
> 
> We are the WG.  Are you saying that substantive discussions 
> of your proposals are not welcome?  Not sure what the point 
> of participating is if that's the case.

Sorry, I didn't realize that "I find it abhorrent" qualified as
substantive discussion.  My fault.  Won't happen again.

> I'm dealing with a serious insurrection of folks who believe 
> that the ES4 working group has a bad attitude, based on 
> Brendan's public comments and responses to issues like this 
> one.  They're quite visible.

Debate is only good.  I merely pointed out the obvious thing, namely
that until there is an alternative proposal written up to deal with
this issue, the current design stands unless the WG, as a group,
decides to just get rid of it (leaving the problem it was designed
to solve solution-less).

I like the idea of making non-public-namespaced properties be
not-enumerable and getting rid of DontEnum.  We've talked loosely
about it for a while.  But it's remained loose talk, it has never
made it to the stage where it is a coherent proposal.

--lars



More information about the Es4-discuss mailing list