Complete Minimal Classes

Brendan Eich brendan at
Fri Apr 6 21:10:14 PDT 2012

Kevin Smith wrote:
>     Arbitrary prototype properties is surely to draw fire. It can be a
>     foot-gun and might conflict with instance properties in the future.
> Foot gun: yes.  I've shot myself in the foot with it.  But I think it 
> can be addressed in a way that's footgun-proof.  We're going to need 
> arbitrary prototype properties at some point.

Why? I mean, what built-in in ECMA-262 or a DOM spec needs non-method 
data properties? Methods and accessors, yes. Constants go on the 
constructor. I'm probably forgetting some bogus Java-like WebIDL binding 
rule here...

> Otherwise, we have to do something painful like:
>     if (this instanceof MyClass)
>         // construct it
>     else
>         return new MyClass(...args);

Even here, you can be spoofed by calling the constructor on an 
already-constructed instance. It's hard to tell 'new' from invocation by 
checking facts about |this|.


More information about the es-discuss mailing list