| 12:00 | <sideshowbarker> | I see the “Change Array by copy“ proposal https://tc39.es/proposal-change-array-by-copy/ seems to have been implemented (and shipped?) in Firefox — https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1729563. Has it been implemented in any other browser engines yet? |
| 12:09 | <Ashley Claymore> | I think it is still behind a compile time flag in Firefox. It has started to ship in Safari tech preview. But the spec has changed (and could change again) since it was implemented there |
| 12:13 | <sideshowbarker> | OK, thanks — then I’m going to suggest we close https://github.com/mdn/content/pull/9940 for now — rather than keeping it open indefinitely — and revisit it if/when things level out later. That PR’s been hanging open for more than 7 months now, and in general I don’t think it’s so great to keep PRs open that long. |
| 12:30 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | I'm reading the If I have two iframes containing |
| 12:32 | <littledan> | the referencing script or module is more about fetch options or the base URL/referrer; it doesn't control which realm things happen in |
| 12:33 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | But if it's the same referencing script/module both times (and in this case it's both times null), they cannot be executed in two different realms (because it can only be executed once) |
| 12:37 | <littledan> | How so? Are you referencing the HTML spec in your analysis, or is this based on JS more generally? |
| 12:38 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | I'm just reading the requirements and note of https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-hostresolveimportedmodule in ecma262 |
| 12:39 | <littledan> | it seems totally possible that we need to add more requirements or change the existing one. I have trouble making sense of the module import hooks without referencing HTML concretely, tbh |
| 12:40 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | I'll check the HTML spec to see what it does |
| 12:41 | <littledan> | just curious, are you looking into this in relation to the current ShadowRealm controversy about using a null referrer? |
| 12:41 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | Nope, I was reading it to understand how to properly describe module blocks caching |
| 12:42 | <littledan> | interesting, hopefully the referrer doesn't matter much in that case! |
| 12:42 | <littledan> | we might have an HTML PR for that feature, or maybe we didn't get around to it, I don't remember |
| 12:42 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | Agree! But I wanted to fully understand how caching is speified |
| 12:48 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | Ok, I believe that HTML violates the requirements for that host hook, but HTML does the only sensible thing and we should relax the requirement in 262. I'll open an issue with a proper description of what I think we currently do and what we should do. |
| 12:50 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | (or maybe I'm just wrong, and I'll relize it when writing it down 😂) |
| 17:04 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | littledan FYI, the issue is https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/2803 |