Proxy.isProxy (Was: using Private name objects for declarative property definition.)
david.bruant at labri.fr
Wed Jul 13 02:07:52 PDT 2011
And in general, the main use case for proxies is to emulate host
objects. If there is a language construct that helps separating the two
cases, we're going against this use case.
Le 13/07/2011 10:26, Andreas Gal a écrit :
> I really don't think IsProxy is a good idea. It can lead to subtle
> bugs depending on whether an object is a DOM node, or a wrapper around
> a DOM node (or whether the embedding uses a proxy to implement DOM
> nodes or not). In Firefox we plan on making some DOM nodes proxies for
> example, but not others. I really don't think there is value in
> exposing this to programmers.
> On Jul 13, 2011, at 1:23 AM, Tom Van Cutsem wrote:
>> Perhaps Proxy.isProxy was used merely as an example, but wasn't the
>> consensus that Proxy.isProxy is not needed? Dave pointed out that it
>> breaks transparent virtualization. Also, there is Object.isExtensible
>> which always returns |true| for (trapping) proxies. That means we
>> already have "half" of Proxy.isProxy without exposing proxies: if
>> !Object.isExtensible(obj), obj is guaranteed not to be a proxy.
>> 2011/7/9 Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com <mailto:brendan at mozilla.com>>
>> Also the Proxy.isTrapping, which in recent threads has been
>> proposed to be renamed to Proxy.isProxy or Object.isProxy.
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss