On Sun, Jun 30, 2024, at 06:59, Rob Landers wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2024, at 01:28, Saki Takamachi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> > Hello internals, >> > >> > I've updated the RFC to include final-ish examples (barring any further >> > constructive feedback), a prototype implementation, and an objections >> > section. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > Rob >> >> It seems like the "hack" I mentioned is still possible, am I >> misunderstanding something? > > That’s always going to be a possibility, no matter what we do or how we do > it. I think it would be a rather pointless hack now that I can run the code. > For the most part, the engine treats these as numbers and trying to dodge > that will land you in hot water eventually.
After playing with the code and seeing what I could get away with, making the GMP class `readonly` appears to prevent many abuses, so I have amended the RFC and prototype code. > >> >> And I don't understand the purpose of polyfills at all. If you're not using >> the GMP extensions and can't do operator overloading, won't you just have a >> class with protected methods that are never used and don't actually do >> anything? > > Ah, that could probably be clearer in the RFC, but you have to make it public > to be able to use it. I've iterated it a few times in the text of the RFC. — Rob
