To me CustomElements V1 is the API that would have benefited most from origin trials. It was specced unpolyfillable (relying on ES6 syntax) which real dev exposure would have immediately found. Classic failure of backroom standardizationhttps://twitter.com/slightlylate/status/1139626438766673920?s=19 …
-
-
-
Replying to @rwaldron @cramforce
constructor `super()` calls. Other option was (V0's) prototype swizzling.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
They core problem is that to be "truly native", subclasses of host objects and intrinsic types (e.g. Array, Number, etc.) need a way to signal to the runtime that they are "special". For DOM, this means wiring up a C++-side pointer to a backing struture (in ~all impls).
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate @cramforce
Lol, thanks for describing that as if I wasn't literally sitting next to you when JS class inheritance was designed :P I remember early sketches of custom elements using class syntax, but I stopped tracking the development, which is why I didn't know that there was a dependency
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
This here twitter-dot-com is a big room and other people might be listening! Didn't mean any disrespect.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.