- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 16:09:15 +0000
- To: public-webcrypto@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26322 --- Comment #3 from Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> --- Thanks, that's very helpful. Regarding the [Cached, Constant, Frozen] approach: 1) Is there a concept of Frozen objects (maps) as well as of Frozen arrays ? 2) Is it important that the JS array / object is created when the attribute is first accessed, rather than when the thing implementing the interface that contains that attribute is created ? Another approach, I guess, would be to use the new maplike IDL, so then the algorithm attribute would have a readonly maplike interface that returns the members of the object in the [[algorithm]] internal slot (except that, if a member is itself an object we'd want to return something with a maplike interface that returned the members of that inner object and so on). The difference, IIUC, is that if we use maplike there is no JS object for this thing and I suppose there may be things you might expect to be able to do with a (frozen?) object that you cannot do with a readonly maplike (anything that does not rely on duck-typing, I suppose). It seems there is no arraylike ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Monday, 6 October 2014 16:09:16 UTC