@@toStringTag spoofing for null and undefined

[Brendan Eich]

Mark S. Miller wrote:
>
>     IIRC David Ungar's question to Tom was "why not enable proxies to
>     mega-program every base-level operation in the language?" I took
>     this to mean nothing like a nominal type check could evade
>     proxying, in David's vision. Is this plausible in your view?
>
>
> No it is not. It destroys the whole point of branding if passing a 
> brand check guarantees nothing.

The counter-argument I inferred from the Q&A (this was in 2011, IIRC you 
were there too ;-) would answer in two parts:

1. Needless-nominal type tests should be replaced by structural-type tests.

2. Any remaining brand or trademark test can use object identity or 
equivalent unforgeable capability.

(2) can't be meta-programmed to spoof identity. But it doesn't leave 
anything like nominal types as found in many languages lying around as 
an attractive nuisance (and how, in Java!).

Now plausible?

/be