- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:54:24 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: >> In terms of existing ArrayClass objects that are shipping on the web right >> now, Gecko is shipping (though perhaps not in final releases yet) the .ports >> of a MessageEvent and the return value of getClientRects(). I _think_ >> changing the concat() behavior of these should be OK. Certainly for .ports, >> which we haven't been shipping for very long at all. >> >> Thoughts? > > Could we still change those to actual arrays? I guess for .ports that > might be trickier as it implies a readonly view. Lets just return a frozen Array. I know that people on TC39 has said that it's ugly, but I still think it's far less ugly than creating a whole pile of host classes just because we lack immutable arrays. > ArrayClass feels like a hack. Agreed. / Jonas
Received on Monday, 28 October 2013 23:55:21 UTC