- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 17:02:53 -0400
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- CC: Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com>, Brandon Benvie <brandon@brandonbenvie.com>, public-script-coord@w3.org, es-discuss@mozilla.org
On 8/12/12 4:55 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > There was a bunch of previous discussion about this at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2012JanMar/0010.html > and following, though it's not clear to me now whether the solution we > decided on allows var to shadow these named props as desired after all... And in particular, it's interesting to compare the claims from Ojan in that thread about web developer desires to the practice of what they actually expect that we ran into with indexedDB... In any case, it does sound to me like putting the GSP on the proto chain is not enough to get the behavior if the ES5.1 behavior stays as-is unless it explicitly checks for props on the global itself a la http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2012JanMar/0030.html Note that data in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2012JanMar/0033.html suggests that IE also implements the erratum to 5.1 we were talking about up-thread. Oh what a tangled web we weave. But the whole thread is worth reading (even if I was just as confused back then about the spec status of the var shadowing behavior: I thought it was in ES5, not in an erratum to 5.1). If nothing else it contains somewhat of a description of how Gecko and IE implement their global scope polluters. -Boris
Received on Sunday, 12 August 2012 21:03:27 UTC