LSP (was Re: Function.prototype.bind) [offtopic]

Jon Zeppieri jaz at
Wed Sep 10 18:52:40 PDT 2008

On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:43 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood
<david.hopwood at> wrote:
> Graydon Hoare wrote:
>> Mark S. Miller wrote:
>>> [LSP] still a good design rule ...
>> Yup,
> As stated ("... the behavior of P is unchanged ..."), it's too strong.
> It should have been stated in terms of a subtype refining the
> specification of a supertype.
>>> in languages (like JavaScript) with nominal subtyping (via instanceof).
>> Oh goodness, don't say that while the type theorists are in the room!
> Indeed. ES3 has exactly one type, and it has no name.

Does it?

More information about the Es-discuss mailing list