- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 21:14:14 -0400
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com>, public-script-coord@w3.org
On 6/15/11 8:25 PM, Cameron McCormack wrote: > My plan was (and I’ve written a patch to the spec to do this but haven’t > committed it yet) to redefine [[GetOwnProperty]] (as opposed to [[Get]]) > to make it appear like real own properties exist on the object. That > means Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor would return a descriptor for > these objects. > > However, they would still be an additional layer on top of the “real” own > properties on the object (assuming we didn’t outlaw own array index > properties altogether like I suggested a couple of mails back), so that > if an item is removed from a collection, an own property with the same > name would be revealed again. > > I just want to make sure that’s consistent with your “catch-all getters/ > setters” comment. Yeah, that seems fine. Especially if the property descriptor is just a value descriptor. -Boris
Received on Thursday, 16 June 2011 01:14:58 UTC