Having a non-enumerable Array.prototype.contains may not be web-compatible
waldron.rick at gmail.com
Tue Sep 30 16:51:48 PDT 2014
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Jason Orendorff <jason.orendorff at gmail.com>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Andrea Giammarchi
> <andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm personally against unmaintained code and/or websites but here it's
> > ES7 breaking the web, it's a library already broken (somehow) due native
> > prototype pollution without a mechanism to prevent these, apparently
> > historically known, problems.
> Either way, you're telling me I should ship a browser that chokes on
> thousands of web sites that work fine today. That would be bad for our
> users, so I'm not planning on doing that.
I support your decision to back it out for now and the foreseeable future.
This will give devs a chance to evangelize the necessary updates.
> > it is also already patched and it's also a small fix.
> The 6.5% of existing web sites using JS libraries that use MooTools
> have not been "already patched". Patching 3.5 million web sites is not
> a "small fix" in any relevant sense. It simply will not be done
> thoroughly or soon.
> > If sites and developers have no reason to update code 'cause ES7 cannot
> > release until they'll change a file ... why would they anyway.
> Yes. You have correctly identified incentives as a problem.
> That does not constitute a reductio proof that browser vendors must
> ignore their users' interests and break the web. "Reductio ad
> the-world-is-not-as-I-wish-it-to-be" is not a thing.
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss