Experimental implementation of Object.observe & JS Utility library now available

Brendan Eich brendan at mozilla.org
Fri Aug 17 18:49:01 PDT 2012

All praise to Raf et al., my concern is that something synchronous, plus 
event loop concurrency and setImmediate, would suffice to bootstrap the 
rather more elaborate proposal on top of the simpler O.p.watch like 

This is not to say we shouldn't standardize higher-level APIs, and 
instead push that off on library authors to write, and users to 
download. There's a delicate balance here. We often screw up 
higher-level abstractions in annoying ways, but perhaps that risk is 
worth taking.

What I'm really getting at is this: why not expose the synchronous 
primitive and e.l.c. building blocks as well?


Brandon Benvie wrote:
> I agree on the above with regard to Proxies. They are awesome and 
> allow for incredible things, but Object.observe fills a different use 
> case that I think is more common at at the user standpoint or at least 
> library standpoint. When you look around at the major JS libraries 
> that exist the problem they are trying to solve (after DOM 
> normalization) is data-binding. Proxy can be used to solve this for 
> new objects or wrapped objects, but that's overkill and may have 
> performance consequences, and has no support for working with existing 
> objects. Proxy and observe end up filling two completely different 
> use-cases, and I would venture to say that observe is the one that 
> most people could make better use of if they had it in their hands today.
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

More information about the es-discuss mailing list