[Bug 26322] Definitions "algorithm" and "usages" properties of CryptoKey make no sense

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26322

--- Comment #33 from Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> ---
(In reply to Boris Zbarsky from comment #30)
> > can you provide any example of any other Web Platform API that uses Freeze
> 
> Can you provide any example of any other Web Platform API that has an
> attribute that returns JS arrays?  Fundamentally we're on new ground here.

I haven't looked in depth (because there's _so many_ disparate specs in various
states), but WebRTC at least is an example of a similar problem, and the
sequence situation with CSP(3?) seems similar.

(In reply to Boris Zbarsky from comment #31)
> > More precisely that don't return immutable objects.
> 
> Or even more precisely, that returns objects that have immutable internal
> state but can have that shadowed from naive JS in the usual way.  But since
> they have the immutable internal state, one can provide ways of getting at
> that state.  ES arrays have no such internal state, hence no way to get at
> it.

The updated language has Key with the immutable internal state, and it returns
the cached state. I'm not entirely sure why the exposed attribute itself needs
to have immutable internal state, since its internal state is not used by the
Key implementation.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Received on Saturday, 8 November 2014 03:12:58 UTC