Closed caridy closed 10 months ago
LGTM modulo possible terminology clarification.
@erights I'm not 100% sure, I was reading the following section of the spec:
https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-hosts-and-implementations
And it seems to me that "host environment" (which typically includes objects or functions which allow obtaining input and providing output as host-defined properties of the global object) is the right term for this definition. Maybe one of the editors can help here.
LGTM modulo possible terminology clarification.
@erights I'm not 100% sure, I was reading the following section of the spec:
https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-hosts-and-implementations
And it seems to me that "host environment" (which typically includes objects or functions which allow obtaining input and providing output as host-defined properties of the global object) is the right term for this definition.
Yeah, there's a circularity problem in deciding whether this resolves the problem: What's "host-defined"? Does it cover "implementation-defined"? My inclination is actually that it does, in which case your current language is fine. But I'd like to remove any ambiguity on that point.
Maybe one of the editors can help here.
Please!
@mhofman wrote:
In my mind the Host is the part that defines hooks and extensions for which the implementation is not specified in ECMA262, where implementation is for the parts covered by this spec. Since this spec text does not provide for an implementation to expose objects across the callable boundary, only host-defined behavior would if not constrained.
@erights that's the way I see it. we should be fine here.
@ptomato can we take this one to the finish line?
Please take a look at whether this updated language satisfies the concerns.
I got the verbal approval from @mhofman on this one, merging!
This PR implements the consensus achieved during Dic 1, 2022 plenary with respect to normative text that prevent a violation of the callable boundary.