Search results

What is the story for disambiguation?

needs consensus

Status: Open.

#70 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· LeaVerou opened on Jan 7, 2026

·  

Jan 2026 plenary

The <code>implements</code> operator should work on instances too

needs specificsConsensus on the idea but it needs to be fleshed out with more concrete details, an algorithm, etc.Consensus on the idea but it needs to be fleshed out with more concrete details, an algorithm, etc.

Status: Open.

#69 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· Jamesernator opened on Jan 7, 2026

What should happen if the same member is both required and provided?

needs consensus

Status: Open.

#67 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· LeaVerou opened on Jan 7, 2026

·  

Stage 2

interaction with private names

needs spec editsToo low-level for the explainer, but needs to be reflected in the spec (and isn't yet).Too low-level for the explainer, but needs to be reflected in the spec (and isn't yet).

Status: Open.

#66 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· michaelficarra opened on Jan 7, 2026

·  

Stage 2

protocols should be born frozen

needs editsWe have a resolution, but it is not yet reflected in the explainerWe have a resolution, but it is not yet reflected in the explainer

Status: Open.

#65 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· michaelficarra opened on Jan 7, 2026

Defer <code>implemented by</code>?

needs consensus

Status: Open.

#63 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· LeaVerou opened on Jan 6, 2026

Should protocols be able to run per-instance initialization logic? (constructor side effects)

likely nopeConsensus to not do this or heading that way. Rejected proposal, wontfix, etc.Consensus to not do this or heading that way. Rejected proposal, wontfix, etc.

Status: Open.

#62 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· LeaVerou opened on Jan 6, 2026

·  

Later

Can provided members satisfy other protocols?

needs consensus

Status: Open.

#61 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· LeaVerou opened on Jan 6, 2026

·  

Jan 2026 plenary

Should protocols be able to implement other protocols? And if so, do we still need <code>extends</code>?

needs consensus

Status: Open.

#60 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· LeaVerou opened on Jan 6, 2026

don't allow any required/provided fields to be called constructor/prototype

needs editsWe have a resolution, but it is not yet reflected in the explainerWe have a resolution, but it is not yet reflected in the explainer

Status: Open.

Task

#57 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· michaelficarra opened on Jan 1, 2026

·  

Jan 2026 plenary

Symbol-setting sugar seems to be useful on its own

needs editsWe have a resolution, but it is not yet reflected in the explainerWe have a resolution, but it is not yet reflected in the explainer

resolvedConsensus reached, question answered, etc.Consensus reached, question answered, etc.

Status: Open.

#56 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· LeaVerou opened on Nov 22, 2025

How to access provided member implementations?

needs consensus

Status: Open.

#55 In tc39/proposal-first-class-protocols;

· LeaVerou opened on Nov 20, 2025

·  

Jan 2026 plenary