Re: [heycam/webidl] Introduce the observable array type (proxy-based) (#840)

> With the no-holes prohibition in place, I agree it should be black-box identical. (Without that the backing list gets awkward and needs to have holes in it.) I had some version of this locally before abandoning it for the current one, which reuses more machinery.

I am re-creating this version now (but didn't quite finish by end of day) since if we have a backing list, it's much more convenient to let spec authors manipulate it, and this only works if we also implement the getOwnProperty / ownKeys / etc. handlers to reflect any spec-side changes to the backing list. Combined with how a version with the extra handlers sounds closer to how folks would implement this, it seems like the right direction to go.

(I have a [question on whether we need get/set/hasProperty traps too](https://es.discourse.group/t/are-integer-indexed-exotic-object-get-set-and-hasproperty-just-optimizations/228?u=domenic) if you have any idea.)

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/heycam/webidl/pull/840#issuecomment-588493140