-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Normative: make Function.prototype.toString forward-compatible and fully defined #697
Conversation
d9c32e7
to
bdc0ee1
Compare
bdc0ee1
to
99c32d8
Compare
99c32d8
to
ba8c8d5
Compare
ba8c8d5
to
8c31ecd
Compare
8c31ecd
to
86d35ae
Compare
In the January 2018 TC39 meeting, the committee decided to wait to advance Function.prototype.toString to Stage 4 (and land this patch) until we add a corresponding mechanism for allowing implementations to not return all of the source code. One such mechanism would be @domenic 's Function.prototype.toString() censorship proposal. |
@littledan see tc39/Function-prototype-toString-revision#26 for the PR that addressed that concern and tc39/Function-prototype-toString-revision#30 for a PR addressing @anba's comments. |
8d55499
to
ba5e401
Compare
Does HostHasSourceTextAvailable require that a host basically has a set of all its built-in functions? How does that work if the set of functions differs across agent/realm-boundaries? |
@annevk I thought that hook wouldn't be called on native functions, as their |
I see, this would only be for "userland" functions... I'm a little curious what tc39/Function-prototype-toString-revision#25 (comment) is about as without that it's somewhat tough to evaluate whether this works. |
@annevk Considering the PR (tc39/Function-prototype-toString-revision#26) was approved by @domenic, I'm sure it satisfies his needs. |
Well, he also said it'd require hand-waving, so I'm curious to see what that means in practice. |
@annevk I'll bring it up during the stage 4 presentation. |
dacd250
to
1112e2c
Compare
@tc39/ecma262-editors I've removed the |
This proposal reached stage 4 at the November 2018 meeting. Please prioritize it over other PRs. Thanks! |
We’ll look at it first thing in next week’s editor meeting. |
cf647d7
to
8406c18
Compare
@michaelficarra i've rebased this PR on latest master; can you confirm that my conflict resolution worked out? |
LGTM otherwise. |
…lly defined - aligned with tc39#1363
These lines didn't appear in tc39#697. @ljharb says that was likely an oversight: tc39#1458 (comment)
These lines didn't appear in tc39#697. `@ljharb` says that was likely an oversight: tc39#1458 (comment)
Implements the currently stage 3 proposal at https://github.com/tc39/Function-prototype-toString-revision. This PR is part of the new stage 4 entrance criteria.
Fixes #664.