david-sarah at jacaranda.org
Sun May 17 17:05:10 PDT 2009
Brendan Eich wrote:
> On May 17, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
>> On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com>
>>> Analogous to direct vs. indirect eval in ES5 (188.8.131.52.1), there is no
>>> purely syntactic specification for what Neil proposes. A runtime
>>> check is required. So I don't see why you are focusing only on syntax here.
>> I don't follow. What runtime check? For the eval operator, the runtime
>> check is whether the value of the eval variable is the original global
>> eval function. It makes no sense to have a corresponding global yield
>> function value.
> If we reserve yield then you're right. One of the appealing (at least to
> me) aspects of Neil's suggestion was that it would avoid opt-in
> versioning required by reserving yield (which is used in extant web
> content, or was when we tried reserving it without opt-in versioning --
> the particular use was as a formal parameter name, used as a flag not a
Oh, right. We've been talking at cross-purposes. I assumed that you were
suggesting that 'yield' should be contextually reserved. That is what
I've been saying couldn't work due to ambiguities.
David-Sarah Hopwood ⚥
More information about the es-discuss