Skip to content

Added HostEnsureCanCompileStrings and evalable#209

Merged
ljharb merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
mikesamuel-patch-1
Apr 3, 2019
Merged

Added HostEnsureCanCompileStrings and evalable#209
ljharb merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
mikesamuel-patch-1

Conversation

@mikesamuel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

These would provide github.com/wicg/trusted-types what it needs to provide source-to-sink security for code strings.

These would provide github.com/wicg/trusted-types what it needs to provide source-to-sink security for code strings.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@ljharb ljharb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please add both of these to the next agenda :-)

| [evalable][] | Mike Samuel | Mike Samuel | |
| [Function bind syntax][bind-syntax] | Kevin Smith | Brian Terlson<br />Matthew Podwysocki | [March 2015][bind-notes] |
| [Function expression decorators][func-expr-decorators] | Igor Minar | Igor Minar | |
| [HostEnsureCanCompileStrings passthrough][heccspt] | Mike Samuel | Mike Samuel | |
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This one seems like a needs consensus PR more than a proposal to me.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok. So is the process:

  1. rework it as a PR against tc39/ecma262/spec.html,
  2. attach the "needs_consensus" label,
  3. schedule 15 minutes under "9. Web compatibility issues / Needs Consensus PRs" on the agenda

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's certainly up to you if you want to bring it as a proposal - it's possible that some delegates will insist it be one, but it's also possible that delegates will consider it more of a PR.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In PR form: tc39/ecma262#1498

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@ljharb Thanks for explaining. I'll go with PR for now, and have the proposal ready if it's clear that's the way the committee wants to handle it.

@ljharb ljharb merged commit fd9610c into master Apr 3, 2019
@ljharb ljharb deleted the mikesamuel-patch-1 branch April 3, 2019 15:49
@mikesamuel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Please add both of these to the next agenda :-)

Will do. Thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants