Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 12/13/12 1:32 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
>>
>> The invariants say that you cannot claim to be non-configurable and
>> then have observable changes that should have been possible. The
>> invariants purposely allow the opposite "violation": a property can
>> claim to be configurable but still refuse to be configured.
>
>
> Interesting.  That would require some extra magic to keep track of
> properties that are "really" non-configurable (in terms of behavior)... and
> would also not work for the whole self-hosting thing.

Works perfectly for self hosting. The extra state is kept in the handler.


>
>
>> but I think Allen's suggestion below is better.
>
>
> Yeah, I have no problem with that one.
>
> -Boris



--
    Cheers,
    --MarkM