Necessity of a syntax construct for bind
david.bruant at labri.fr
Wed Aug 31 02:28:54 PDT 2011
Le 31/08/2011 10:52, Lasse Reichstein a écrit :
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:46 PM, David Bruant <david.bruant at labri.fr
> <mailto:david.bruant at labri.fr>> wrote:
> Le 30/08/2011 21:59, Lasse Reichstein a écrit :
>> A reliable .call could probably also achieve the same.
> A reliable .call could be achieved by composing a reliable .bind
> and the function call syntax.
> True. The Bind operation is the currying of the Call operation.
> Ah, that got me thinking. I can do
> var CallFunction =
> since bind does give a different way to set the this-object for a
> call. This can be done once, before anybody gets to mangle the
> builtins, and can be stored for afterwards. Excellent!
Of course, it requires a native Function.prototype.bind, but that's
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss