07:50 | <annevk> | [Exposed] works on methods, but only to constrain. So the solution would be to move setTimeout to an AllTheGlobals mixin that has [Exposed=*] and is included by Window , WorkerGlobalScope , etc. |
15:41 | <tolmasky> | Is there a term that means symbols + objects (+ functions, although thats implied by objects). Like there's primitives vs. objects, I'm wondering if theres a concise way to say "symbols and objects" |
15:45 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | In the R&T proposal we say "unforgeable values": you cannot recreate them unless you already hold a reference to them |
15:45 | <nicolo-ribaudo> | However, it does not include Symbol.for symbols |
15:46 | <tolmasky> | interesting |
16:16 | <bakkot> | tolmasky: "value with identity" https://tc39.es/ecma262/multipage/notational-conventions.html#sec-identity |
16:17 | <bakkot> | though that also covers spec-internal values, but outside the context of the spec that's probably fine |
17:09 | <ljharb> | ftr i'm not a fan of using "identity" in that way, but that's what the editors chose. i'd just say "symbols and objects" personally (outside the spec) |
18:01 | <TabAtkins> | "reference types" is how I refer to them to myself |
18:01 | <TabAtkins> | vs value types |
18:02 | <TabAtkins> | and i'm certain i'm making, like, some c++ people cringe for that |
18:31 | <tolmasky> | haha |
18:31 | <tolmasky> | chatgpt suggested reference types |
18:51 | <ljharb> | lol yeah, they are kind of "reference values" but so many people mistakenly think JS is pass by reference that i think the word "reference" would cause way more confusion than it'd clear up |
19:59 | <Mathieu Hofman> | Yeah reference types is too confusing given that unique symbols are a primitive with unforgeable identity, but registered symbols (the same type) do have a forgeable identity. |
20:00 | <Mathieu Hofman> | We should find a good name as I expect unique symbols to not stay the only special case of unforgeable values. |
20:00 | <Mathieu Hofman> | (aka we'll ultimately get some kind of composite identity, whether that's records/tuples as currently proposed or a separate proposal) |
20:07 | <TabAtkins> | "ocap types" |
21:10 | <Mathieu Hofman> | lol, that would probably be too obscure for most people ;) |