Andrea Giammarchi

I have exactly same fear that developers will think it's then OK to use `__proto__` so there won't be concretely any benefit in dropping `Object.setPrototypeOf` here. TC39 agreed on `Object.setPrototypeOf`...

as extra note, in node `__proto__` is not behaving as expected concretely across versions. Again, there are older V8 accepting `__proto__` in objects created via `Object.create(null)` or `{__proto__:null}` while this...

P.S. I've said Chrome, well, at least `Object.setPrototypeOf` is already in Canary and latest builds of V8 so Chrome will follow (if it hasn't done it already). Just as extra...

@cscott the only abused example I have is the usage of `Dict` ``` javascript var Dict = Object.create.bind(null, null); var o = Dict(); o.__proto__; // will it blend? ``` If...

@cscott in comments: > setPrototypeOf.polyfill === false means it's not 100% reliable node 0.11 is using a version that does not expose `__proto__` but it does not accept it neither...

P.S. as last reminder … all these problems with `__proto__` **are** the reason `Object.setPrototypeOf` has been proposed and accepted.

@cscott sorry for bothering once again … last thought: When anyone uses `var o = {__proto__:null}` they do not expect to use later on `o.__proto__ = Array.prototype` because by specifications...

FYI: node.js `v0.11.13-pre` includes native `Object.setPrototypeOf`

FYI: [Java 8 nashorn](http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/articles/java/jf14-nashorn-2126515.html) **ships without `__proto__`** but it implements `Object.setPrototypeOf(O,p)` … as you can see, it's rather `__proto__` finally disappearing from the scene, instead of `Object.setPrototypeOf(O,p)` being a _sham_...

nothing can be implemented 100% in ES3 … `Array.prototype` is enumerable, as example, in there so `es5-shim` should be 90% `sham` … does this make any sense? I hope no