brendan at mozilla.com
Thu Dec 27 20:38:03 PST 2012
Andreas Rossberg wrote:
> On 27 December 2012 18:25, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com
> <mailto:brendan at mozilla.com>> wrote:
> That is, if having it at all, I'd still think it much wiser to
> ban it to some Appendix.
> What earthly good would that do?
> Marketing and psychology (as I said, being important). It would send a
> clear message that it is just ES adopting some bastard child because
> it has to for political reasons, but with no intention of ever making
> it a true bearer of its name. In other words, it isn't noble.
In one sense, whatever floats your boat.
In a more serious vein, we are at cross purposes with reality. Mutable
__proto__ just *is*. It is a de-facto standard. Doesn't mean we
shouldn't fight [[Prototype]] changes where better methods of achieving
desirable semantics exist. But calling mutable __proto__ a bad thing,
deprecating it, will not work, and therefore the attempt degrades the
coin of TC39's realm: our attitude and opinion on normativity.
Self had writable parent slots. One can disagree with the design
decision, but it's not unique to JS or uniquely evil. We swallowed this
turd. No point whinging about it in appendices that either no one reads,
or else people read and think less of the spec on that account.
More information about the es-discuss