bzbarsky at MIT.EDU
Wed Jun 18 10:07:46 PDT 2014
On 6/18/14, 11:39 AM, Erik Arvidsson wrote:
> This also fits how @@create works for DOM, where the creation of the
> instance would set up the internal DOM wrapper pointer, never exposing a
> non initialized DOM object to user code.
Note that in that setup it's impossible to introduce an HTMLElement
constructor like this:
var el = new HTMLElement("iframe");
because the @@create doesn't have the tag name available to create the
right sort of object...
This is the flyweight object issue that was mentioned up-thread too: if
you have to examine your arguments to decide what sort of object to
create, then @@create is not a viable option.
Whether we need to make this sort of constructor possible is a separate
issue, of course; for newer specs we're using separate interfaces for
separate things, so don't need this sort of constructor, I think.
More information about the es-discuss