- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 22:41:54 +0000
- To: public-script-coord@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8241 Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED CC| |adrianba@microsoft.com, | |travil@microsoft.com Resolution|FIXED | --- Comment #9 from Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> 2011-06-19 22:41:54 UTC --- I assumed since there was no [OverrideBuiltins] on the interface that that's how it behaved everywhere. Stupid of me to assume. :) Here's a small test (not to do with var, just with visibility of the named properties): http://people.mozilla.org/~cmccormack/tests/window-named-override.html * Firefox shows window objects for toString, open, alert & history, and do the normal property lookup for document and the variable. (This might be because `window.hasOwnProperty("document") == true` in Firefox.) * Safari/Chrome show window objects for toString, open & alert, and do normal property lookup for document, history and the variable. (This might be because IDL attributes are still own properties on the object in these implementations.) * Opera shows a window object for toString, document & history, and does normal property lookup for open, alert and the variable. (So maybe Opera is not letting named properties override functions from Window, but otherwise is [OverrideBuiltins].) * IE does normal property lookup for all of them. I guess Firefox/Safari/Chrome behaviour can be summarised as "resolve own properties first, then named properties, then properties from the prototype". IE's behaviour matches the spec for a non-[OverrideBuiltins] interface -- any properties that exist on the object itself or prototype get resolved in preference to the named properties. This is also the most consistent of the lot. Would pages with non-IE code paths break if all the other browsers switched to this? All of this might be more a question for the already-resolved bug 10340, but it does impact on how we might require [ReplaceableNamedProperties] to be implemented. We already require funny [DefineOwnProperty] etc. behaviour to handle named properties, so I don't think it's too much of a stretch to extend them to handle [ReplaceableNamedProperties]. The alternative which I guess is what Boris is alluding to is to have named properties appear to be on an object somewhere in the prototype chain instead, so that assigning to them or doing a variable declaration gets the right behaviour without adding more specialness into [DefineOwnProperty]. If we work under the assumption that Window is indeed non-[OverrideBuiltins], like IE, then that extra object in the prototype chain still needs to have special [GetOwnProperty] behaviour so that it first resolves properties from its own properties or its prototype chain before returning the named properties. If we did something Safari/Chrome-like, where you resolve own properties, then named properties, then prototype properties, then you could stick an extra object in the prototype chain above the Window object which behaved like [OverrideBuiltins]. Again, this would avoid making the changes to [[DefineOwnProperty]] I made in comment 7. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 19 June 2011 22:41:56 UTC