W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > January to March 2014

[Bug 20567] Change [[Prototype]] for concept-node-adopt?

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 05:32:54 +0000
To: public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-20567-3890-RbaqEEG1Sl@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20567

--- Comment #72 from Bobby Holley (:bholley) <bobbyholley@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Adam Barth from comment #71)
> Long thread is long.
> 
> (In reply to Anne from comment #70)
> > I recall 1) slightly differently. I will define in DOM that UAs must change
> > prototypes.
> 
> I'm not sure everyone agrees that's the most desirable thing for DOM to
> require...  If the two of you don't recall the conversation in the same way,
> wouldn't it make more sense to clear up that miscommunication first?

My recollection is that Dmitri's (1) was raised at one point, to which Boris
asked "so are we just going to call this undefined and go home?" Anne wasn't
enthusiastic about this option.

Dmitri explained that he had talked to abarth during the fire alarm, and that
abarth had indicated that globals were baked into objects in V8, and that
moving objects between globals wasn't really an option in Blink. Anne (?) then
asked if there was a reason Blink couldn't just swizzle the prototype (to keep
observables the same) and leave the underlying state (not taking advantage of
the leak-plugging, but matching the observables of Trident and Gecko, which
do). Boris pointed out that this must be possible, because __proto__ is
script-mutable in Blink. I don't recall Dmitri objecting to this, though to be
fair it wasn't really his topic of interest nor within his domain of authority.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2014 05:32:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:37:51 UTC