tc39 / proposal-function-implementation-hiding

JavaScript language proposal: function implementation hiding

https://ci.tc39.es/preview/tc39/ecma262/pull/1739

tc39/proposal-function-implementation-hiding Issues

Ability to disable the directive
Updated 3 months ago16
Should "show source" be part of this proposal?
Updated 7 months ago6
Explain how hiding will actually work
Updated 9 months ago5
Opinion: this will cause lot of "mystery bugs" in Sentry-style applications
Updated 10 months ago35
A possible syntax form
Updated 2 years ago1
Clarification on the use case of protecting against callers inspecting functions' parameter names
Updated 2 years ago9
What should the pragma be named?
Updated 2 years ago35
Function source text serialization in error messages
Updated 3 years ago5
Semantics of top-level directive
Updated 3 years ago1
Provide a way to determine native implementations
Closed 3 years ago4
When would these directive get used?
Closed 3 years ago10
Requesting more details on the motiviation for two directives
Updated 4 years ago4
should non-simple parameter lists be allowed to mix with these new directives?
Updated 4 years ago2
ecosystem consideration: JS self-profiling API
Updated 4 years ago
Hiding implementation of classes breaks the `is‑callable` package
Updated 5 years ago5
Examples of stack position information restricting refactoring
Updated 5 years ago12
Clarification on stack frames revealing confidential information
Closed 5 years ago4
Implementation of unhandled rejection/uncaught exception logging in Node.js
Closed 5 years ago6
What's the behavior of nested function?
Updated 5 years ago4
Should this also censor `.name`?
Closed 5 years ago10
high-fidelity polyfill use case seems to impact error stack traces
Closed 5 years ago2
The behavior of ‘sensitive‘ on `Error.p.stack`
Closed 5 years ago5
GetDirectiveContext broken?
Closed 5 years ago2
What if it will be used by malicious code injected by browser extension or XSS?
Closed 5 years ago6
Appendix statement untrue for some engines
Closed 5 years ago5
Decorator-like syntax suggestion
Closed 5 years ago15
enumerate security properties guaranteed by the "sensitive" directive
Closed 5 years ago1
add note that a follow-on proposal may add "preserve implementation" directive
Closed 5 years ago1
Class-body directive prologue is incompatible with class fields
Closed 5 years ago18
Spell out stack hiding in more detail / maybe align with built-ins
Closed 5 years ago4
reconciling the disparate function implementation hiding use cases
Closed 5 years ago2
Why describe censored code as "[native code]"?
Closed 5 years ago3
Impact on observability tools relying on stack traces
Updated 5 years ago7
shouldn't this proposal be dependent of the error stacks proposal?
Closed 5 years ago4
change the "website" URL for the repo
Closed 5 years ago1
Interaction with other proposals and use cases
Closed 5 years ago4
Explain why we think this won't become boilerplate in every source file
Closed 5 years ago4
Add non-normative text clarifying what this actually does
Closed 5 years ago15
Motivation for pragma?
Closed 5 years ago5
Explain more why pragma is the best fit
Closed 5 years ago1
More info regarding the difficulties involved in "cloning" functions
Closed 5 years ago2
Consider a different name besides "censorship"
Closed 5 years ago
Interaction with stacks?
Closed 5 years ago10
Censoring code should only be possible for native code, not userland code
Closed 5 years ago32
Why not censor all functions, or at least cross‑module functions?
Closed 6 years ago3
This pragma is *very* long...
Closed 6 years ago1
"Function.prototype.toString()-Censored Code" copypasta
Closed 6 years ago
Symbol?
Closed 7 years ago1