ES4 draft: Object
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.
More information about the Es4-discuss