- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 16:06:48 +0100
- To: Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com> wrote: > We can't prevent people from writing poor code, but we don't have to be an enabler of it. As I understand things, part of the goal of TC39 is to be able to explain the platform in terms of JavaScript. Currently the platform has a ton of these identity checks. "Is /x/ a node", "is /x/ an element", etc. We should be able to explain those and I hope that symbols are going to give us that, although it will depend on the specifics I suppose. Not having those in script might make developer-written library code more brittle. E.g. I get an untrusted array that I want to filter for elements to process further. There's no way to distinguish between element instances and prototype objects. And so code down the road might invoke a method and get a TypeError because it was invoked on something that's not an instance. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 7 August 2013 15:07:18 UTC