SpiderMonkey folks are trying to align with the ES6 soon-to-be spec on proxies, and they would be grateful if we could move from the old, unspecced Proxy.create() API to the new, ES6 standards-track "direct proxies". i believe Erik is going to update preferences/service.js in bug 980565, and that leaves just system/environment.js, util/iteration.js and one content-script test. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Proxy

I'm willing to work on it but need help.

hi Anuj, that's great. what exactly do you need help with? here is a page describing how to contribute to the Jetpack project: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/wiki/contribute

(In reply to Tomislav Jovanovic [:zombie] from comment #2) > what exactly do you need help with? Can you tell me how I should replace Proxy.create() with new Proxy() in this line- http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/addon-sdk/source/lib/sdk/util/iteration.js#15

that line is a bit special, as it's basically a "hack" to get to the ES6 @@iterator symbol (even before it's implemented). i believe this should be: for (let _ of new Proxy({}, {get: (_, name) => { throw name; } })) but you should try doing the other, more regular uses of Proxy.create(). to help with that, i suggest you study both the documentation for new direct proxies [1] and how they differ from the old API [2]. [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Proxy [2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Old_Proxy_API and ask if you get stuck.

Comment on attachment 8400024 [details] [diff] [review] bug986294.diff hey Jordan, can you take this review please? i don't feel comfortable doing it, especially after talking with Eric Faust, who said he didn't do the whole conversion to direct proxies because the semantics seemed different enough.

the test string overload (test-content-script.js) test fails, as do the environment tests. the `iteratorSymbol` works, and things that use it are working (sequence, list), but the other two conversions aren't currently. I would recommend checking out the master repo (mozilla/addon-sdk) on GH to run the tests, and also submit a PR through there, rather than a patch for m-c. Let me know if you have any questions

Irakli has a patch for this in bug 1110457

Irakli's pull request depends on bug 783829 according to him in https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/1746

hey Irakli, bug 783829 was resolved, wanna commit it now? (SM guys are anxious to remove Proxy.create)

(In reply to Tomislav Jovanovic [:zombie] from comment #11) > hey Irakli, bug 783829 was resolved, wanna commit it now? (SM guys are > anxious to remove Proxy.create) That change has landed now.

(In reply to Irakli Gozalishvili [:irakli] [:gozala] [@gozala] from comment #12) > (In reply to Tomislav Jovanovic [:zombie] from comment #11) > > hey Irakli, bug 783829 was resolved, wanna commit it now? (SM guys are > > anxious to remove Proxy.create) > > That change has landed now. So this bug is RESOLVED FIXED or is there something missing?

I still see the following three uses of Proxy.create: addon-sdk/source/lib/sdk/system/environment.js 15:exports.env = Proxy.create({ addon-sdk/source/test/addons/e10s-content/lib/test-content-script.js 264: let p = Proxy.create({ 329: // return obj._proxy = Proxy.create(...); addon-sdk/source/test/test-content-script.js 264: let p = Proxy.create({ 329: // return obj._proxy = Proxy.create(...);

This code will now generate a warning.

This is not necessarily a perfect match for the old semantics, but it passes the tests and I assume it's good enough for most reasonable uses of this API.

Sorry about the bug spam, just forgot the refresh for two times.