Small Proposal "!in"

[Andy Earnshaw]

On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 at 14:48 Mike Samuel <mikesamuel at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael Theriot <
> michael.lee.theriot at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > 'string' === typeof document.createElement('input').type
>> > // true
>>
>> It should be noted this is a "loose check"; it does not determine whether
>> or not the property exists when its value equals undefined. It also
>> triggers getters, whereas `in` reports whether or not the property exists
>> without triggering a getter.
>>
>
> Good point.   `in` does trigger "has" proxy handlers though, so neither is
> side-effect free.
>

Except I'd argue this is a desirable side effect in the case of `in` and
less so in the case of a getter.  Getters are more likely to be an
intensive operation (for example, innerHTML) than a proxy `has` operation
generally overriding the expected behaviour of the target object.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20180719/7781a930/attachment.html>