Module isolation

David-Sarah Hopwood david-sarah at
Mon Jan 11 11:26:47 PST 2010

David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
> David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
>> Brendan Eich wrote:
>>> On Jan 10, 2010, at 9:30 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
>>>> Brendan Eich wrote:
>>>>> For many current applications, the frozen |this| object is not necessary
>>>>> or desirable in global code. The essential characteristic of modules,
>>>>> isolation for each module's "inside" from unimported effects of other
>>>>> modules, does not necessarily mean no mutation of primordial objects.
>>>> On the contrary, it does necessarily mean that. If you can mutate
>>>> primordial objects, then there is no isolation of any module. There
>>>> may be a reduction in the possibilities for accidental interference
>>>> between modules, but that should be distinguished from isolation.
>>> Who said primordial objects are shared between modules?
>> Having separate copies of primordial objects for each module is not
>> sufficient to ensure isolation. If one module has access to some object
>> obj of another, it can also get access to that object's prototype chain
>> using Object.getPrototypeOf(obj), or obj.constructor.prototype.
> Correction: obj.constructor[.prototype] gives access to the constructor
> chain.

Ignore this; there was nothing to be corrected here.

David-Sarah Hopwood  ⚥

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 292 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list