Environment settings objects vs global objects

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Environment settings objects vs global objects

Anne van Kesteren-4
Hi,

There's quite a few of concepts that seem to map 1:1 to globals. I'm
wondering if I should try to get rid of environment settings objects
in favor of adding its internal slots to global objects. I could also
add them to Realms I suppose, if that was preferred. Not sure what the
current thinking of Realms vs globals is. I guess Realms might make
more sense if we're getting that Realm object.

https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/167 has some extra words.

Thanks,


--
https://annevankesteren.nl/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Environment settings objects vs global objects

Bobby Holley
If the only reason for this separation was the theoretical possibility of a different scripting language on the web, I'm all for merging them. The cross-origin object spec uses a bunch of ES-specific MOP stuff anyway.

bholley

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Anne van Kesteren <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

There's quite a few of concepts that seem to map 1:1 to globals. I'm
wondering if I should try to get rid of environment settings objects
in favor of adding its internal slots to global objects. I could also
add them to Realms I suppose, if that was preferred. Not sure what the
current thinking of Realms vs globals is. I guess Realms might make
more sense if we're getting that Realm object.

https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/167 has some extra words.

Thanks,


--
https://annevankesteren.nl/