Re: [RFC] Asymmetric Visibility, with readonly

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022, at 7:11 AM, Stephen Reay wrote: > The proposed __set behaviour in this RFC will mean the second example > **won’t work**, and that is both extremely unintuitive and IMO, > technically unnecessary with regards to avoiding BC breaks. > > Cheers > > Stephen Thanks to the wonders of real-time high-bandwidth communication (online chat), we've been able to clarify and adjust the behavior of a-viz with __set in a way that is internally consistent and has no BC breaks. I've updated the RFC accordingly with the dirty details, but the long story short is that we've been able to define it such that unset() is no longer necessary on set-not-visible properties; they'll still trigger __set without that. Readonly properties still do, as they do today, but that's off topic to think about. I also clarified that static properties are explicitly not supported with a-viz. That's mainly for implementation reasons; it's just really hard to do, and as it's of limited value we're not going to bother. --Larry Garfield