W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-security@w3.org > November 2012

Re: CSP 1.1 DOM design

From: David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 15:42:27 +0100
Message-ID: <5097D053.5050002@gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
CC: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, public-web-security@w3.org
Le 05/11/2012 15:31, Boris Zbarsky a écrit :
> On 11/5/12 5:56 AM, David Bruant wrote:
>> Arguably, ES6 symbols may give a re-birth to ad-hoc collection types by
>> allowing safe (uncollidable) extension of built-ins. I think an IDL
>> array is fine (as far as I can tell, the difference with a regular array
>> is just a different prototype).
>
> Actually, the prototype of IDL arrays is Array.prototype.
My bad. I confused IDL arrays with [ArrayClass]; I wasn't aware of the 
existence of IDL arrays.

> The differences between IDL arrays and ES arrays per spec as of today 
> are:
>
> 2)  Object.prototype.toString behavior.
About this point, it seems that the class string of IDL Arrays is 
"Array" which is the same than ECMAScript arrays. So my reading of 
WebIDL is that IDL arrays have an equivalent Object.prototype.toString 
behavior than ECMAScript arrays.

David
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 14:42:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 5 November 2012 14:42:58 GMT