allen at wirfs-brock.com
Mon Feb 13 12:11:14 PST 2012
On Feb 13, 2012, at 11:43 AM, Gavin Barraclough wrote:
> On Feb 13, 2012, at 9:55 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
>> Finally, an alternative to extending [[Get]] and [[Put]] would be to extend the GetValue abstraction operation (8.7.1) and the Simple Assignment evaluation semantics (11.13.1).
>> [[DefineOwnProperty]] and [[Delete]] still need to be extended but, independent of any of the above, these two can probably be made over-riding implementations on Object.prototype rather than extending the default implementations used by all objects.
> Hi Allen,
> I don't know if this is helpful, but Mark's strawman seemed to make this much simpler, perhaps it might make for a less intrusive specification to define that this should behave as if it is an accessor property following Mark's ProtoGetter/ProtoSetter descriptions, whilst leaving how the property is reflected ambiguous? I think this should amount to the same thing, just might be easier to encapsulate this way?
I believe what that amounts to is specifying the property as (not "as if") an accessor property with ProtoGetter/ProtoSetter get/set functions and then specifying a [[GetOwnProperty]] over-ride for Object.prototype.__proto__ that allows an implementation to choose between returning a data property descriptor and returning a accessor property descriptor with censored get/set functions.
There would still need to be a way to specify that special treatment of __proto__ in object literals is disabled when Object.prototype.__proto__ is modified or deleted. While this could be done with prose I think using [[Delete]] and [[DefineOwnProperty]] hooks (and the UnderscoreProtoEnabled variable) is a more precise why to specify what actions are required to actually disables __proto__.
In general, I prefer preciseness over conciseness in the specification.
Also, I think we need some more thought about how the approaches (specified as accessor vs. specified as [[Put]]/[[Get]] extensions) differ in the presence of proxies.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss