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

> Notably classes that use those must sync to any mirrors manually, if they want to, and some classes that use indexed setters don't seem to want such a mirror. (Example: [HTMLOptionsCollection](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/common-dom-interfaces.html#dom-htmloptionscollection-setter).)

Well..  HTMLOptionsCollection _does_ maintain a mirror, in the form of the `<option>` kids of the `<select>`.   I can see how there was a sort of terminology issue here...

> because it's building on non-rigorous foundations. (Apparently nothing in CSS actually dictates what style sheets are applied to a page

Yup.  The current rigor of the CSS specs is awful.

> 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.

Right.  To be clear, I am fine with having a clean spec abstraction, if it's non-leaky enough that actual implementation can do something observably same but possibly more efficient or reusing more existing implementation machinery.


-- 
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-589290276