-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Add JSRT support for native callbacks with new.target
#4529
Merged
chakrabot
merged 2 commits into
chakra-core:master
from
boingoing:NativeCallbackSupportNewTarget
Jan 11, 2018
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -58,3 +58,5 @@ JsReleaseSharedArrayBufferContentHandle | |
|
||
JsLessThan | ||
JsLessThanOrEqual | ||
|
||
JsCreateEnhancedFunction |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't know if this is a particularly productive bikeshed, but how set in stone are we on this name? I feel like we could instead call these ES6Functions rather than EnhancedFunctions? I fear of a situation like https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd317812(v=vs.85).aspx, where we might need to change this API again in the future and we are stuck with CreateFunction, CreateEnhancedFunction, and... CreateExtraEnhancedFunction? ES6Function might be confused with arrow functions, so maybe this doesn't have a good solution.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agree with the sentiment. We can not change
JsCreateFunction
orJsNativeFunction
easily, though. I considered just naming the new oneJsCreateFunction2
to avoid giving it a name and just acknowledge that it's newer. Don't think ES6Function means much, though. I had named itJsNativeFunctionWithInfo
but the functionJsCreateFunctionWithInfo
sounds like you need to pass info in order to create the function.JsNativeFunctionWithNewTarget
is too specific. MaybeJsNativeSubclassableFunction
orJsSubclassableNativeFunction
but that may discourage use for ordinary function callbacks?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My thinking for JsCreateES6Function was that the important difference here compared to JsCreateFunction was that you gained access to an ES6 feature, new.target. If the eventual goal is to get this into Windows, is there any value in actually following the naming scheme with JsCreateFunctionEx? The only concern is that a new spec will add a new feature and we will be in the same bad situation right now, except that we will have a new naming ambiguity.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As long as it hasn't shipped in Windows, we're treating these API as experimental. So I suppose we can change the name until that point. Not that we should change it many times or anything, but the option is open.