name anonymous functions on property assignments

Andrea Giammarchi andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com
Sun Jul 26 19:55:37 UTC 2015


with all due respect Allen, I'm completely against magic-function-name
assignment for various reason and leaking ain't one.

What could you assign in ES6 that cannot be retrieved anyway through
getOwnPropertySymbols and getOwnPropertyNames ? A triple-magic private
Proxy handler or what?

I mean, the moment you could access that method is the moment it could leak
with or without a name, right?

Just curious about what you had in mind, again I agree having this in is a
no-go.

Best Regards

On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>
wrote:

>
> On Jul 26, 2015, at 5:11 AM, Benjamin Gruenbaum wrote:
>
> > In theory this sounds like a cool idea, I didn't even know variable
> assignments named functions.
> >
> > The only issue I see here is how we're now differentiating assignment by
> where it happens - what if the property is computed? As far as I know
> function names are more constrained (like variable names) in what they can
> be. Object properties may contain characters that function names may not.
>
> the possibility that the property key is a symbol is a primary reason that
> this expression form does not set the `name` property.
>
> There may also be security concerns.  The `name` property potentially
> leaks via the function object the name of the variable it is initially
> assigned to.  But there isn't much someone could do with a local variable
> name, outside of  the originating function.  But a leaked property name
> potentially carries a greater capability.
>
> Allen
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150726/c34c1dd4/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list