Re: document.register and ES6

I guess it isn't a show stopper for poly-*ish*-fills, I would just wrap the
native document.register method where it is present > sniff the incoming
prototype property value to detect whether it was baked > cache the unbaked
prototype > then pass a baked one to the native method.

Of course this means we'll (I'll) be evangelizing a polyfill with a
slightly augmented wrapper for taking unbaked objects, but for IE
compatibility devs will probably offer their first born, so I doubt they'll
bat an eye at such a benign incongruity.

Daniel J. Buchner
Product Manager, Developer Ecosystem
Mozilla Corporation


On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com> wrote:

> Remember where we started: absurdly clean ES6 class syntax.
>
> Requiring class definition class using property descriptors is a radical
> march in the other direction.
>
> I'm hardcore about syntactical tidiness. The reason I'm not freaking out
> about defineProperties is IMO because I can avoid it when I don't need it
> (which is about 99% of the time).
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Daniel Buchner <daniel@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
>> I just made sure it worked, and it does. As for developers freaking out,
>> I really don't believe they would. If that was the case,
>> Object.defineProperties should be causing a global pandemic of whopperdeveloper freakouts (
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhF6Kr4ITNQ).
>>
>> This would give us easy IE compat for the whole range of property types,
>> and I'm willing to all but guarantee developers will have a bigger freakout
>> about not having IE9 support than the prototype property of
>> document.register taking both a baked and unbaked object.
>>
>> Daniel J. Buchner
>> Product Manager, Developer Ecosystem
>> Mozilla Corporation
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Daniel Buchner <daniel@mozilla.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> So you're directly setting the user-added methods on matched elements
>>>> in browsers that don't support proto, but what about accessors?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I believe those can be forwarded too, I just didn't bother in my fiddle.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Equipped with the unbaked prototype descriptor, in your upgrade phase,
>>>> you should be able to simply bake the node with:
>>>> Object.defineProperties(element, unbakedPrototypeDescriptor) - right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, but I believe developers would freak out if we required them to
>>> provide that type of descriptor (I would).
>>>
>>>  <snip>
>>>
>>
>>
>