has the syntax for proxies been finalized ?
Tom Van Cutsem
tomvc.be at gmail.com
Mon Oct 21 07:20:18 PDT 2013
2013/10/18 Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>
> This is what I currently have in my working draft of the ES6 spec:
> In other words:
> you can say:
> but not
> new Proxy(target, handler)
> It would be easy enough to allow
> new Proxy(target,handler)
> but I'm not sure it is the best way to expose the Proxy abstraction .
> Proxy really isn't a "class". There is no Proxy.prototype object and obj
> instanceof Proxy isn't useful. Also the @@create protocol really isn't
> right for instantiating Proxies. Subclassing a Proxy isn't going to give
> you anything that is useful.
I agree with your line of reasoning and I would be happy if proxies can be
created without `new`. However, I don't see how the above spec disallows
the use of `new`. With the above definition, won't `new Proxy(target,
handler)` just work? (since the Proxy function just ignores its
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss