Question about joined function object of ECMA-262 3rd edition

Shijun He hax.sfo at
Sun Aug 5 09:54:13 PDT 2007

In my opinion, the optimisation such as closure prototype in the
spidermonkey is enough and joined function optimisation is useless
(and wrong). If the developer want reuse the same function object,
they can write like this:

function A() {
A.B = function (x) {
  return x * x;

On 8/1/07, Brendan Eich <brendan at> wrote:
> No, none of that (breaking backward compatibility, requiring closures
> for mutability) was desired.
> I wasn't around for Edition 3 except for one or two meetings (pitched
> sharp variables and uneval/toSource), but I talked to Waldemar about
> this at some point. The goal was to allow an optimization that would
> be implementation dependent. I believe mutability was forgotten. So
> we should just remove all this joined function language.

More information about the Es4-discuss mailing list