Changing [[Prototype]]

Brendan Eich brendan at mozilla.com
Fri Dec 28 11:57:36 PST 2012


Andreas Rossberg wrote:
> On 28 December 2012 11:51, David Bruant <bruant.d at gmail.com 
> <mailto:bruant.d at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Le 28/12/2012 11:20, Brendan Eich a écrit :
>
>         David Bruant wrote:
>
>             What about a specific section of the spec called "de facto
>             standards"? It would indicate that it's part of the
>             standard, but is a scar from history rather than a legit
>             feature.
>             An intro would explain what this is all about.
>             It would be an interesting middleground between normal
>             spec features (which people take for the Holy Graal) and
>             appendices (which people will skip).
>             __{define|lookup}{G|S}etter__ would fit well in this section.
>
>         Those never made it into IE. Why include them? There's a
>         bright line drawn by interop.
>
>     I've seen Node.js code with it.
>
>
> That's a good point, actually. I, for one, do not understand the 
> criteria by which we chose to include __proto__ but not 
> __defineGetter__ and friends.

It wasn't Node.js that drove that -- it was the "mobile (iOS WebKit 
first) web" that wanted __proto__ due to libraries such as Zepto.

We have not heard equivalent demand from outfits such as Microsoft and 
Mozilla trying to gain mobile market share and interop with "mobile web" 
content. Not sure whether Opera ever weighed in.

__proto__ is simply much more used than __{define,lookup}{G,S}etter__. 
Degree counts along with kind (turd or not :-P).

/be


More information about the es-discuss mailing list