- From: David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 09:54:24 +0200
- To: Brendan Eich <brendan@meer.net>
- CC: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, "tomvc.be@gmail.com" <tomvc.be@gmail.com>
For the record, rationale for not including a trap for instanceof was described here: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proxies#interaction_with_instanceof Le 22/06/2012 03:43, Brendan Eich a écrit : > Let's negotiate. Perhaps an API solution such as 'is' is better, but we should decisively reject instanceof first. Cc'ing Tom. > > /be > > On Jun 21, 2012, at 6:31 PM, Cameron McCormack<cam@mcc.id.au> wrote: > >> David Bruant: >>> The direct proxy proposal lists the things that can't be faked by the >>> handler and instanceof is one of them. >> Exactly. A while ago, Web IDL used to require the [[HasInstance]] behaviour that Gecko has for its old-style bindings, where it didn't matter which global the RHS constructor object came from. Once we starting considering what is possible for pure JS implementations, we dropped that. Since there's no hasInstance trap on proxies, it would not be possible to implement a Web IDL interface object with pure JS. >>
Received on Friday, 22 June 2012 07:55:01 UTC