| 15:39 | <Michael Ficarra> | What are the next steps on bringing structuredClone into the language? https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/2555 Should it just be a needs-consensus PR? Was anyone planning on working on it? /cc @syg |
| 16:41 | <shu> | i'm not planning to work on it. next steps IIRC was to satisfy Mark's Proxy requirements |
| 16:41 | <shu> | i don't recall the details |
| 19:23 | <bakkot> | basically just add a branch for proxies which uses the standard MOP operations just as if they were ordinary objects |
| 19:23 | <bakkot> | pretty trivial to spec, I can write it up if you want |
| 19:24 | <bakkot> | but I have basically given up on trying to get WHATWG to do things |
| 19:24 | <bakkot> | maybe I gotta start going to whatnot meetings or something |
| 19:25 | <bakkot> | alternatively we could in principle change the definition while pulling it in, which might be easier procedurally |
| 20:05 | <Michael Ficarra> | 🙏 @bakkot yes please get structuredClone over the finish line |
| 20:13 | <bakkot> | writing the spec is not actually the hard part |
| 20:33 | <bakkot> | here: https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/12348 |
| 20:55 | <shu> | writing the spec is almost never the hard part |