indirect eval spec too severe?

Brendan Eich brendan at
Fri Jan 23 10:26:16 PST 2009

It's a bit late for this for 3.1, first point. Second, it's a  
migration tax from non-strict mode that I'm pretty sure we do not  
need. Indirect eval using only global scope creates no hazards other  
than the usual ones associated with the extensible top level object.


On Jan 23, 2009, at 10:13 AM, Igor Bukanov wrote:

> 2009/1/18 Mark S. Miller <erights at>:
>> The Mountain View draft says:
>>>    Strict Mode Restrictions
>>> If strict mode code uses the value of the eval property any way  
>>> other than
>>> as a direct call (that is, other than by the explicit use of its  
>>> name as an
>>> Identifier which is the MemberExpression in a CallExpression), or  
>>> if the
>>> eval property is assigned to, an EvalError exception is thrown.
>> I believe this spec is too severe
> The intention of the spec is very close to saying that in the strict
> mode eval is a keyword. So why not to say so? To compensate for the
> severity of this restriction that prevents useful indirect eval calls
> the spec may add an explicit function with the semantics of the
> indirect eval, like compute.
> Regards, Igor
> _______________________________________________
> Es-discuss mailing list
> Es-discuss at

More information about the Es-discuss mailing list