Mark S. Miller
erights at google.com
Mon Feb 4 13:50:07 PST 2013
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:
> Tom Van Cutsem wrote:
>> 2013/2/4 Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com <mailto:brendan at mozilla.com>>
>> If notification proxies require allocation per trap activation,
>> that's a fatal flaw in my view.
>> Did you mean to say action proxies? Action proxies do require allocation
>> per trap activation, and I also considered this a fatal flaw.
> I was replying to Mark, so meant notification proxies.
> Notification proxies require allocation of a post-trap when they need to
>> do something after the operation was performed on the target.
> Yes, and (just to respond to Mark's somewhat premature "maybe notification
> proxies will defer proxies from ES6") that seems like a fatal flaw, in
> spite of the post-trap condition.
Saying that a maybe is premature seems a bit much.
In any case, you may be right that this is a fatal flaw. You're making a
performance-based argument, and it is certainly premature one way or the
other to predict how these relative costs will balance out. Let's wait till
we have more data.
> The post-trap could be cached and reused, but only if the post-processing
>> is independent of the specific arguments passed to the intercepted
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss