B.3.1 The __proto__ pseudo property

Mark Miller erights at gmail.com
Tue May 7 22:10:39 PDT 2013

The special syntax can't go into Annex B; it must remain in the main text.
Allen's message agrees with this. I agree that consistency suggests that
the property go in the main text, but doesn't demand it. What would be
gained by moving the property alone to Annex B? If nothing, then I think
this consistency should win.

On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:

> Mark S. Miller wrote:
>>         2) Object.prototype.__proto__ is moved back to Annex B.
>>     Since __proto__, unlike __defineGetter__, provides functionality
>>     that is otherwise unavailable, all JS platforms will treat it as
>>     mandatory whether we put it into Appendix B or the main text. At
>>     this point, I think moving this back to Appendix B would be an
>>     obviously meaningless gesture
>> My "since" is incorrect, as the functionality is available via
>> Object.setPrototypeOf. Nevertheless, I still think this would be a
>> meaningless gesture. OTOH, since it is meaningless, it is also mostly
>> harmless.
> Having __proto__ in the main spec be a special form when used as a
> property name in an object literal, but relegating
> Object.prototype.__proto__ to Annex B, seems inconsistent just on that
> basis, too. One place or the other -- main spec or Annex B -- but not both.
> /be

Text by me above is hereby placed in the public domain

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130507/96838a9c/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list