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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
fix(core/dfn): treat internal slots as IDL attributes #3646
fix(core/dfn): treat internal slots as IDL attributes #3646
Changes from 5 commits
a836e8a
700a8e1
0d5c2d8
204af22
fb81bb0
04ee056
aeeea2d
500895f
45cbbaa
074d0d9
a665899
c5d8632
a12748f
bf914ed
9e0cf9d
6b235d0
cd0468a
061a6df
e57dbeb
f029503
567761c
c8c99c4
2e7e714
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
This is something that will be fixed in follow-up, right? i.e., a new
internalSlot
type andinternalSlotMethod
maybe?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 think so.. See, for example:
https://respec.org/xref/?term=%5B%5BCollectFromCredentialStore%5D%5D%28origin%2C+options%2C+sameOriginWithAncestors%29
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.
Will the existing tools throw if we introduce a new
dfnType
here?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.
re new type, discussion started in speced/spec-dfn-contract#1
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.
This is repeated (with same args) in each test here. Can probably move it into a
beforeAll
?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.
It's specific to this particular
describe()
group, so beforeAll is probably not ideal... wish they had a "before you run these tests".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 think
beforeAll
is scoped todesribe()
blocksThere 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.
Ok, will try. The docs said they beforeAll was global.