W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: document.register and ES6

From: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 15:15:21 -0800
Message-ID: <CADh5Ky3yegY2gQnW44hWEwkLhJ_sVGYEDMw7bWN8Bd86tE976g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Daniel Buchner <daniel@mozilla.com>
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> On 2/6/13 5:07 PM, Erik Arvidsson wrote:
>
>> This refactoring is needed for ES6 anyway so it might be worth looking
>> into no matter what.
>>
>
> Well, yes, but it's a matter of timeframes.  It's incredibly unlikely that
> a complete refactoring of how functions are implemented (which is what I
> was given to understand would be required here) could be done in the next
> several months to a year....  I doubt we want to wait that long to do
> document.register.


This is a valid and important concern. Boris, in your opinion, what is the
most compatible way to proceed here? I see a couple of options, but don't
know how difficult they will be implementation-wise:

1) Expose the ability to override [[Construct]]. Arv tells me that he spoke
with V8 peeps and they think they can do this fairly easily. How's the
SpiderMonkey story looking here?

2) Until ES6 is here, return a generated constructor from
document.register, which is the approach that Scott/Arv/Daniel came up with
for polyfills. Effectively, this generated constructor will serve as the
surrogate [[Construct]] override.

3) ...

4) PROFIT

:DG<
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2013 23:15:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:57 GMT